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

[Drew Adams]

> > > Because á does include a diacritical. By specifying it, the user
> > > told us the diacriticals are important, and shouldn't be
> > > disregarded.
> >
> > I disagree. When I search for "Müller" I want it to also match
> > "Muller"
> 
> Then you should type "Muller" instead of "Müller".

I believe Ulrich is specifically asking to be able to type (or
paste) "Müller" _instead of having_ to type "Muller", to match
both "Müller" and "Muller".

Telling him to just type "Muller" ignores his request and his
argument that it is useful to be able to do what he asks.

That's all we've heard, so far, as an argument against the
proposal: You don't need it; just get by with the canonical
chars instead of accented chars in search strings, if you
want char folding.

No reason given why someone should not _be able_ to do
what Ulrich wants.