Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote: > Well, Doug, I see your point; different topics should be kept > separate. But I changed the subject line precisely because the thread > has shifted from discussion of compression to a general discussion of > normalisation stability.
That's true; most people would probably notice the change in subject line. I was a little disappointed that the compression topic had not received more responses, especially from UTC types, before morphing into another subject. One thing that is certain is that any compression algorithm that is allowed to perform normalization must depend on complete stability of the normalization process. Otherwise there is data loss. > But it has not shifted to a discussion of Hebrew. In fact Hebrew > hasn't even been mentioned in this thread in relation to > normalisation, although I did mention it in relation to the discussion > of Korean precomposed characters. I did see it moving in that direction when you mentioned "justification for a refusal to correct errors in combining class allocations," and recalling recent postings on Hebrew combining marks. But you're right that Hebrew itself had not yet been mentioned. > You have simply assumed that I am interested only in Hebrew, which is > not true. I made no assumption about your interests, and was careful not to use your name, but I did make an assumption about the direction the thread was headed. I apologize if that assumption was incorrect, or if my intentions were not clear. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
