On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

>bear <xxxxxx@sonic.net> writes:
>
>> ...but I'm
>> sorely tempted to simply declare all use of eszett, given its
>> unique status in the history of human writing, to be an error.
>
>What happened to the days when computer programmers saw difficult
>problems as interesting challenges, instead of as things to define
>away?

As I said, a temptation; not one I'm going to succumb to.  There
is a solution in place for it.  I just dislike the "solution."

Eszett is offensive because it absolutely *forces* its craziness
back up to the user-attention level, and makes the "correct"
behavior precisely the problematic behavior (strings change length
on case ops) I had managed to completely eliminate for the rest of
Unicode.

				Bear