Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 11:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> 
> > > > We are asking for matches that disregard the diacriticals
> > > > (and in case of ª also higher-order collation-order variation).
> > >
> > > No.  You are asking for that only when you use a search pattern
> > > that does not use the diacriticals.  When you search with á in
> > > the pattern you are NOT asking for matches that disregard the
> > > diacriticals.  And why not?
> > 
> > Because á does include a diacritical.  By specifying it, the user told
> > us the diacriticals are important, and shouldn't be disregarded.
> 
> Again, you are just parroting what the implementation does

??? I explained the interpretation of the user input, how's that
implementation?

> Again, both options for fold matching should probably be available.
> There is no reason to hard-code one of them at design time.
> 
> At least no reason has been put forth so far.

You've got all the reasons, you just refuse to hear them.

Time to bail out.