Unclear text in the UBA (UAX#9) of Unicode 6.3
nospam-abuse at ilyaz.org
Tue Apr 22 16:17:44 CDT 2014
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 07:08:56PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Sorry, I do not see any definition here. Just a collection of words
> > which looks like a definition, but only locally…
> Any definition is just a collection of words, of course. Can you tell
> what is missing from this collection to make it eligible?
This is a very delicate question, of course. And it is very personal:
every definition assumes a certain target population. But let me try:
A) It should be immediately clear which of the possible meanings of
every word/phrase was intended by the author;
B) It should have a unique non-self-contradictory interpretation;
C) The reader should immediately get a feeling that given enough
effort, one will be able to understand what is the interpretation
Now, (A) avoids exponential growth of possible “local
interpretations”. The need for (B) is self-obvious (although what is
self-contradictory would also depend on the reader’s abilities).
And (C) is a major psychological help: usually, (A) cannot stop the
exponential growth of possible “global interpretations” (“how the
pieces are intended to joint together”). Essentially, one gets a tree
of possible choices, and it is crucial that when searching along the
tree, one can cut off “wrong” branches as early as possible.
More information about the Unicode