Re: *Why* are precomposed characters required for "backward compatibility"?

From: David Starner (
Date: Fri Jul 12 2002 - 01:07:31 EDT

At 07:14 PM 7/11/02 -0700, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Programming languages, notably C and its offspring, have appropriated
>these characters for their own purposes. You can't really blame "users"
>for that.

I'm not sure you can blame anyone for that. If you're going to waste
keys on my keyboard for ^, ~ and `, and waste 3 out of 94 graphical
characters in ASCII for them, I'm going to find a use. Next time you
design a universal character set, take more care. (-;

>Except, of course, for any additional user confusion that might have
>arisen from encoding three more lookalike "spoof buddies."

The spoofing problem already exists; adding a few more, with valid
reasons, really isn't going to change anything. Note that ~ and arguably
(Why did Latin-1 and Unicode persist in encoding more of these, BTW?
/Character backspace spacing mark/ was illegal in both of them, and I've
never seen them used for what was overtly their purpose.)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Jul 11 2002 - 21:26:55 EDT