Newsgroups: perl.perl6.internals
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!nntp.perl.org
Return-Path: <bryan.warn...@raba.com>
Mailing-List: contact perl6-internals-h...@perl.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list perl6-intern...@perl.org
Delivered-To: moderator for perl6-intern...@perl.org
Received: (qmail 46011 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2004 01:35:44 -0000
Received: from x1.develooper.com (63.251.223.170)
  by onion.develooper.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2004 01:35:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 12445 invoked by uid 225); 26 Apr 2004 01:35:43 -0000
Delivered-To: perl6-intern...@perl.org
Received: (qmail 12438 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2004 01:35:43 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=7.0
	tests=
X-Spam-Check-By: la.mx.develooper.com
Received: from raba-098.raba.com (HELO s250a.raba.com) (206.98.174.98)
  by la.mx.develooper.com (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:35:42 -0700
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (shell [198.207.179.7])
	by s250a.raba.com (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.2) with ESMTP id i3Q1Zdje015689;
	Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:35:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: One change to the strings document
To: Dan Sugalski <d...@sidhe.org>
Cc: perl6-intern...@perl.org
In-Reply-To: <a06100504bcb1cee40138@[10.0.1.2]>
References: <a06100504bcb1cee40138@[10.0.1.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-ID: <1082943293.6126.31.camel@wakko>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6-1mdk 
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:34:53 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Rating: onion.develooper.com 1.6.2 0/1000/N
Approved: n...@nntp.perl.org
From: bryan.warn...@raba.com (Bryan C. Warnock)

On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 16:34, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Just a heads up, there are two things that have been pointed out.
> 
> First, the transset op is transcharset. The abbreviation was a bit sloppy.
> 
> Second, in spots where "character" is used, substitute "grapheme", as 
> I'm going to. Noting, of course, that a grapheme is *not* a glyph. 
> Glyphs are display things that we're staying very very (very!) far 
> away from. The change'll go into the op names--getglyph instead of 
> getcharacter and suchlike things.
> 
> Hopefully using a different word'll help people remember that 
> glyph!=codepoint, though we'll see how well that one works.

I don't understand.  Substitute grapheme for character, as you're
staying away from glyphs, but "getglyph" for "getcharacter"?

And what about codepoints that *are* glyphs and/but aren't graphemes?

-- 
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)