Markus Kuhn recently said:
> The problem with making it a
> COMBINING RECYCLE ICON
> is exactly the same as with the existing
> U+20E3 COMBINING ENCLOSING KEYCAP
> There is no mechanism in Unicode to enclose more than a single
> character, i.e. you can't even produce a [ESC], [Ctrl], [AltGr] or
> [F4] keycap! Same for [PS] the recycle marker for polystyrene etc.
> I personally think, these more complex enclosing character, which
> usually have to change their size/shape based on the content should not
> be part of a character set such as Unicode. The word processor should
> offer a mechanism to include resizeable (i.e., parameterized) vector
> graphics into documents, which can also be used for arbitrary sized
> brackets, square roots, etc. All these are more graphical elements than
> characters (like underlining, table rules, figures, etc), especially due
> to their shape variability, and therefore clearly outside the scope of
> the Unicode standard (as the combing keycap probably also should have
U+0F3C and U+0F3D managed to get into Unicode.
Ancient Egyptian poses several similar problems as I'm sure you're aware.
-- Tim Partridge. Any opinions expressed are mine only and not those of my employer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:54 EDT