Frank suggested (seconded by Markus):
> > Each maker of terminal emulation products does the same thing, but does it
> > differently, and this is a rather shameful and unnecessary waste of time and
> > labor, and one that inhibits interoperability of applications.
> Then they should band together and get themselves organized so they can
> request the addition of their required graphical segments and line-drawing
> stuff. I don't believe there's that much interest.
I'd like to emphasize Rick's point, even though I'm more sympathetic to
the needs of the terminal emulation products that he might be. What is
missing here is somebody to do the actual work to make the detailed case
for which characters are missing for which terminal emulations, to
make the necessary unifications (if any), and to pull together and
champion an actual proposal for addition of characters in UTC and WG2.
Grousing about missing characters on the unicode list doesn't get them
encoded. Those people who want them must make the case and be willing
to drive through the standardization process in the ISO committee as well
as in the UTC. It won't happen simply because someone says it should
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:42 EDT