Re: Terminal Graphics Proposal

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sat Oct 03 1998 - 05:28:56 EDT

Ar 14:24 -0700 1998-10-02, scríobh Frank da Cruz:
>> I for my part do NOT!!!! want to see these terminal graphic things in the
>> BMP. They belong in Plane 1.
>Perhaps, but as the lawyers say, the door was opened by the characters
>already included in blocks at U+2400, U+2500, U+2600, and U+2700.

I will not support their inclusion in the BMP unless there is a really good
reason. (I'd still make TTFs if necessary though, because I am a loon.) The
list of characters I saw was rather long.

>In any
>case, the intention here is to help Unicode become somewhat more

The UCS is going to be used for centuries. Do we really think VT100
emulation will be needed via BMP support?

>Terminal emulation is a fact of life, and important
>to a significant number of serious and productive computer users; why should
>its special glyphs be excluded from the same status enjoyed by dingbats and
>astrological signs?

Because the dingbats are used in typography, and astrological signs have a
definite semantic.

>Seriously, I think terminal emulation is far more
>mainstream than many Unicoders seem to think, and I hope it is a worthy goal
>to welcome this consituency into the fold, thus allowing them to continue
>their work in their accustomed manner, rather than according to the dictates
>of haute couture, with the added bonus of uniform access to the world's
>writing systems.

I don't see the argument for BMP here.

Michael Everson, Everson Gunn Teoranta **
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Guthán: +353 1 478-2597 ** Facsa: +353 1 478-2597 (by arrangement)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn;  Baile an Bhóthair;  Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:42 EDT