On 08/03/2002 03:32:54 AM "William Overington" wrote:
>Actually, I have suggested some code points in relation to this in the
>following document.
William, it seems like every time you contribute to a thread, you are
suggesting new code points. There are no new code points needed for
digraphs. Period. Unicode already has everything needed to encode digraphs
with aplomb! This goes for Sean's suggestions, as well: they aren't
needed.
I'd encourage you to wait for people who really know and understand
Unicode to comment on someone's suggestion before you start suggesting
code points to see if they're even needed. After all, you've only got 6000
PUA codepoints in the BMP, and you probably don't want to run out of those
too soon (given that plane 15/16 codepoints are unusable on older systems,
which I recall was a concern of yours).
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat Aug 03 2002 - 07:11:18 EDT