[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. .
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. .
- From: "Bollinger, John C" <John.Bollinger@STJUDE.ORG>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:58:07 -0500
- Accept-Language: en-US
- acceptlanguage: en-US
- In-Reply-To: <4C1F84F2.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <AANLkTikPRP0zLmeWCde-UjR599qJBDP4ps8mpT2FB07E@mail.gmail.com><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA541661229515@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local ><email@example.com><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA541661229518@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local ><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA541661229519@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local ><firstname.lastname@example.org><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA54166122951A@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local><4C1F84F2.email@example.com>
On Monday, June 21, 2010 10:28 AM, David Brown wrote: >I can see the advantages of using Unicode in data values where one may >wish to render text is some non-ascii formmat, but is there any reason >why data names should not be restricted (at least for the forseeable >future) to ASCII characters? These names are assigned by COMCIFS and >we are in no real danger of running out of ASCII data names. One day >we may need to write our dictionaries in Arabic, but I doubt that any >of us will be around wheb that happens. If we only allowed non-ASCII >characters in delimited strings we would meet all the needs of the >community for many years to come, and save ourselves a lot of grief >trying to sort out which code points to allow. That's a fair point. I observe, though, that COMCIFS controls data names only in the official dictionaries it maintains, not in local dictionaries or other third-party dictionaries. It appears to be parties maintaining such dictionaries that have the most potential benefit from an expanded character repertoire for data names. Additionally, general users might receive a small benefit from having a larger character repertoire available for use in data block codes. Having come late to the party, I hadn't before considered whether there was a real use case for general Unicode data names, etc.. It was already in the first spec draft I saw. If there is no persuasive use case for it then I don't have any objection to restricting use of non-ASCII characters to within the bounds of one of the multitude of quoted string syntaxes. That would be the conservative choice, suitable to be relaxed later if need be. John -- John C. Bollinger, Ph.D. Department of Structural Biology St. Jude Children's Research Hospital Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- [ddlm-group] Vote on BOM (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Vote on BOM (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. . (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. . (David Brown)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. .
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. .
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Recommended character set and use restrictions. .