Re: fictional scripts revisited

From: Joel Rees (
Date: Fri Feb 23 2001 - 08:33:22 EST

On 2001.02.23 19:42 Arnt Gulbrandsen <> asked:

> Joel Rees <>
> > I'm telling you that 17 planes is not enough, and it _will_ become a
> > constraint in your lifetime.
> How? It looks likely to me that unicode now encodes more than half of the
> characters known by living people. Do you think people are going to
> expand their repertory of characters by a factor of ten or so in the next
> decades?
> --Arnt

Let's try the bait-and-switch tactic.

Characters should be living things.

The common character set should provide the basis for expression, not simply
catalogue a huge number of semi-meaningless token partials that have been
used by a lot of people. And the big one is that I don't care how many
characters are in extension B, it is guaranteed not to be enough to write my
wife's great-grandfather's name correctly, and if we can't record family
history on computers they aren't worth the sand they're made out of.

Naw, It's late over here, my xml is not working, I have to push my bicycle
home about 8 kilometers cause it has a flat and I've wasted too much time
trying to evangelize something I still don't really know how to explain yet
after all and the last bus left about five minutes ago. My imagination is
gone for the week. Maybe I'm not ready to push this thing yet afterall.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:19 EDT