From: Neil Harris (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 22 2005 - 04:14:30 CST
>Please note clearly the distinction between my main proposals, which should be
>implemented officially by Unicode, and this side issue of "Codepoint PUAs".
>On this side issue, consider the following.
>We add to Unicode a small block of "Private Differentiation Selector"
>codepoints, which are to be totally ignored by everything except, optionally,
>a customized smart font.
>The users of Klingon now get together, and decide they are going to use
>"Private Differentiation Selector 5" for Klingon.
>They simply take the codepoints of the Latin letters which transliterate
>Klingon, and pair "PDS 5" with each letter's codepoint.
>Now, users with a smart Klingon font get Klingon glyphs. Users who lack a
>smart font with Klingon glyphs automatically get the Latin transliteration. We
>can also do useful things for learners, by dynamically switching the specified
>font with DHTML in a Klingon learning Web page.
>And there are absolutely no problems with a Korean character showing up in the
>middle of their Web page -- as may currently occur with the PUA.
>So we now see how a small block of codepoints, with almost zero impact on
>processing, can vastly increase the usefulness of Unicode to real-world people.
>What we have done is turn Unicode from a "one dimensional array" into a "two
>dimensional array". The primary (and defaultable) glyphs and meanings get real
>codepoints along the main axis, and secondary (and allowably ignorable) glyphs
>and/or meanings get "differentiators" along the secondary axis.
>That basic principal also applies to my main proposals, which would use other
>sets of "differentiator" codepoints, assigned officially by Unicode.
>It's an extremely useful and efficient system for dealing with things --
>glyphs or meanings -- that have an identity as a "subset" of a real codepoint.
[* head explodes *]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 22 2005 - 04:15:54 CST