Odp: Why is (vv) -> (w) not amongst the Confusables?

[piotrunio-2004@wp.pl]

The confusables property is rather subjective and not very commonly used and due to the very large size of Unicode character set it is therefore highly likely to be incomplete at all times and should not be exclusively relied on. For instance in my opinion U+23AE and U+2502 are identical glyphs in virtually all typographically meaningful uses (especially due to the CP437/WGL4 heritage of U+2320 and U+2321 characters), and yet they're not linked in there. Since there is no objective criteria for what qualifies as a 'confusable' it doesn't seem appropriate to rely on that. I myself wouldn't like to rely on official normalization and case folding rules, let alone confusables.   Dnia 28 listopada 2023 18:04 Richter, Andrew MR via Unicode <  unicode at corp.unicode.org > napisał(a):   OFFICIAL    Hi Unicode ML,                                    I’m trying to determine why “vv” (two of the letter “v”) as a confusable for “w” (a single letter “w”) is not included in the latest Confusables list whereas “rn” (“r” followed by “n”) is included as a confusable
 for “m” (a single letter “m”)? It looks like it was up to version 9.0 but was removed from version 10.0 onwards.     IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence. Unauthorised communication and dealing with the information in the email may be a serious criminal offence. If you have received this email
 in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email immediately.              That is highly likely a fatal messaging error because this is a public mailing list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20231128/8b036d0c/attachment.htm>