[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?

From: Davis Herring
Subject: Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 09:52:12 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110717 Lanikai/3.1.11

> Whether or not this behavior for case-fold is still a good thing
> is questionable now, I think.  I don't think it is necessary now
> or particularly useful.  And I think it can be confusing to
> newbies.  Why should searching for A be different from searching
> for a, wrt case matching?

Because having both input characters mean the same thing uselessly
deprives the user of expressive power.

> Why not?  Why, when char folding, treat plain a specially for
> searching?  Why not treat á, a, à, ã, ª, â, å, and ä the same?

For exactly the same reason.

> And when it comes to chars other than letters, it might well
> be that some users, with some keyboards, will find some chars
> in an equivalence class easier to type than others.  Let them
> use/type whichever they like, no?

It would make sense to provide a customization option to control which
character meant the whole set -- if anyone would use it.  Are there in
fact keyboards where the accented characters are significantly easier?

> This feature, welcome as it is, seems only half-baked, so far.
> How about equality for char-folding equivalence?

These are code points, not oppressed minorities.


This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]