Re: Chinese folding (Re: My prod at IDN requirements)

[James Seng <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> I still don't get it - is this mapping done as part of the unification that
> was done when deciding which characters to put in ISO 10646, or are these
> defined as "equivalences" under some normalization form, but still have
> separate codepoints in the BMP, or do you mean something different?
> If the first one - are those characters among the ones proposed for
> addition to Plane 2?
>
> Sorry to be so stupid - if you just name a couple of examples and what the
> Unicode databases say about them, I may have a better chance of getting it
> right.

We are getting into specifics here. 

But just for interest sake, these 2145 characters are equivalences under
normalization but have separate codepoints in BMP. The question is how do we
treat these characters. If we decided to fold them into one, just like 'A'
matched 'a', then we will have a problem using Unicode.

Then again, we might not choose to fold. :-) There are other ways do it
properly, for example thru aliases of CNAME and DNAME.

So anyone for:
WWW	IN CNAME	www
? :-)

-James Seng