Response to the comments of Mr Michael Kaplan and Mr Doug Ewell.
>Michael (michka) Kaplan <michka at trigeminal dot com> wrote:
>
>> William, please start thinking of the PUA as the city dump. Everyone
>> is glad it is there when you have to stick something somewhere, but
>> no one really talks about it much and no one *ever* wants to take
>> things out of it and strew it on their nice, clean characters.
>
>Oh, that's going a bit far. I think it's more like an attic or
>basement, a handy place to store your old baseball card collection and
>other personal items that don't belong anywhere else, but definitely not
>a place you'd want to invite the neighbors or make the center of
>attention of your house.
>
>-Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
>
I feel that it is important to remember that the word "published" is used in
Chapter 13, section 13.5 of the Unicode specification.
The rules for the Private Use Area are in the Unicode specification. The
word "published" is used in the specification in an example of the use of
the Private Use Area.
I cannot understand why some people seem to want to tell me that the Private
Use Area is not for a purpose which is clearly stated in the Unicode
specification as an example of the use of the Private Use Area. Surely, any
complaint about the matter needs to be sent to the authors of the Unicode
specification, who may, of course, perhaps choose to state that it is not a
mistake but that the specification is correct, that ISO and the Unicode
Consortium do mean that publication of code points is intended as an option
for people who make use of the Private Use Area.
The Private Use Area is a sparklingly splendid facility for the development
of computing applications, which facility has been provided for people to
use.
William Overington
25 May 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat May 25 2002 - 09:08:23 EDT