Janko Stamenovic <email@example.com> wrote:
> So if two Chinese "font variants" exist as different characters what more
> can I say?
> And people here complain about 5 new characters for difference between
> Serbian and Russian?
The fact that Unicode already contains a number of glyph variants encoded as
characters doesn't mean we should add more. Your argument shows where
this leads. Encoding glyph variants and ligatures as characters leads to
for more "characters" like this.
The Chinese (Beijing) system for Tibetan now contains aprox. 6,000
most of which are required ligatures and glyph variants and they apparently
this their standard or official encoding for Tibetan. Maybe we should encode
these as characters in Unicode on the grounds that they are part of a
standard. It would after all make things much easier for people designing
fonts and applications...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT