Re: fictional scripts revisited

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (
Date: Fri Feb 23 2001 - 09:22:08 EST

From: "Joel Rees" <>

> The common character set should provide the basis for expression,

Sounds good so far.

> not simply catalogue a huge number of semi-meaningless token
> partials that have been used by a lot of people.

But what precisely is being expressed? That is where the argument falls

> 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
> 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.

And you expect that some random font will contain the correct ideogram if he
has a name that has never shown up in any record anywhere? Well, possibly --
if you create it or have it created. But you then do have a way to go!

There is a solution for such items, which are in fact based on a private
interest such as this. The PRIVATE USE AREA. Both on the BMP and on a higher
plane if you need more space, they provide a place for you to handle
additions by private arrangement.

I could make a tongue-in-cheek comment that you really only have one wife
who has at most four great-grandfathers, but I won't bother, I think you
know what is being said here. You have quite a lot of space in the PUA,
don't you?

> 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

Sorry for that. :-(

> and I've wasted too much time
> trying to evangelize something I still don't really know how to explain
> 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.

I think the basic problem is that you assume that

1) No one understands what you are saying, and
2) No one involved with the standard has considered the issues you are
presenting here

I can assure you of one thing here: you are mistaken on both counts. :-)

But perhaps you might find that you will get better answers if you come
forward asking "how is ______ dealt with?" rather than "Unicode is
insufficient because it does not deal with _______." (fill the blank with
your favorite issue).

Because if you are mistaken you might find the people who HAVE considered
the issues feel someone insulted by the lack of research, and if you are not
mistaken then the people you ask might be a lot more interested in obtaining
more information from you to solve the problem. In such an approach,
everyone wins.


Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc.

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