Re: An argument against multiple character sets

[Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>]

% 
% At 21:33 00/01/26 -0500, J. William Semich wrote:
% > OK, Patrick, now I see your issues.
% 
% > >'$B%H(J' is one position in the Unicode tables.
% > >'$Bg(J is a different position in the tables.
% > 
% > In this case, why not continue the current practice of downsizing to
% > lowercase characters only? So then,where '=C4' is one position in the
% > UNICODE tables and
% > '=E4' is a different position in the tables (forming the uppercase and
% > lowercase versions of "a-double-dot"), it would make sense to case-fold them. 
% 
% Sorry, but can we agree to only use ASCII for these characters?
% My mailer doesn't handle Latin-1 any more than yours
% handles Japanese, I guess. Many thanks in advance,     Martin.


A more convincing testament to the problems of twisting the DNS to deal
w/ multiple character sets would be hard to find.  Thanks Martin.  And
this brings into sharp focus Patricks point on the need to consider
applications that use data from the DNS.

If "we" can just agree to use ASCII (for these characters), then "we"
are home free (and right back where this discussion started).

-- 
--bill