Erik Fortune continued on this thread:
> I have about thirty keyboards in my office. The variety of symbols engraved
> on keys is staggering; for example, most of the "Enter" keys have an arrow
> of some kind, but the relative proportions of the vertical and horizontal
> strokes vary widely. Do you really want to add code points for each of the
> possible variations?
> If we're going to set aside an area to refer to keystrokes, we should
> identify the keys by function, not appearance. It's certainly more Unicode
> in spirit to do so.
I do not believe we are going to do so. Cf. Murray Sargent's email pointing
out the completely disjunct set of keyboard return codes used in Windows.
There is no good reason to encode all these as characters, nor any other
set of keyboard return codes or functions. Not every integral number associated
with a keyboard in some way is or should be a character.
> If we want to represent keystrokes
> in Unicode, we should represent the keys by function, not by appearance.
We don't want to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT