3 ms·
That's definitely a reasonable thing for governments to care about, since governments generally need to keep track of people's names in some way or other. It's
by scbrg 5y ago
That's definitely a reasonable thing for governments to care about, since governments generally need to keep track of people's names in some way or other.
It's probably a good idea if government computers can keep track of the name, so a minimum requirement would probably be "can be represented by unicode glyphs". So attempts like Prince's should probably be disqualified. And even in the unicode set there are characters that may be problematic - Record Separators, Zero Width Space, Pile of Poo emoji springs to mind as examples, even if the later one might be doable. It's hard to address a letter to a person whose name just consists of a mix of different whitespace characters (especially when their neighbor is a different mix whitespace characters). So, yes, government probably should care about this, at least a little bit.
That said, Æ should probably be allowed. It's a standard character in several living languages.
- CaptainZapp 5y agoI totally agree with your take, except maybe: > That said, Æ should probably be allowed This may cause all sorts of issues, from typing a letter to issuing a passport. Else than that, exactly what I was thinking.
- scbrg 5y agoThe reason I think that maybe Æ should qualify is that it's not entirely unlikely to occur in immigrants' names anyway (or at least the lower case version). There are systems for transforming such characters to something that appears in passports - my own name has an umlaut, and I've obviously got a passport. I'm not American, so my passport is of course not issued in USA, but I suspect few countries would see a name diversity as great as USA so it can't be a new problem for the authorities there.