Thanks again for the very informative reply. > You may still argue that Unicode algorithms are designed for the human text encoded in strings. That's a very nu

Thanks again for the very informative reply. > You may still argue that Unicode algorithms are designed for the human text encoded in strings. That's a very nuanced argument, because one can also argue that they are the best effort approximation of human text operations for strings, in which case they are not the human text operations themselves. For example many languages have a case conversion operation over strings, That is ... very nuanced indeed. Case folding does look to be difficult issue in it's own right, but it's not something I do a lot and besides even 20 years ago it was deferred to a library function (str.lower() or whatever the language provides). The issue the original article correctly says every app trips over is neither nuanced, nor uncommon. It's boring stuff like handling backspace or left arrow cursor movement - stuff programmer have to do all the time, and that is difficult to put in a library. As a consequence they get it wrong over and over again. Unicode representing a grapheme with a single code point would fix that. As you say I'm not sure there is a simple change you could make to Unicode that renders case folding or the other problems you describe easy. To me that's a strong hint it's not the right place to address those problems.