Re: Draft 3 of the proposal to encode an EXTERNAL LINK SIGN in the BMP

From: Andrew West (
Date: Wed Aug 09 2006 - 04:53:10 CDT

  • Next message: Jukka K. Korpela: "Re: Draft 3 of the proposal to encode an EXTERNAL LINK SIGN in the BMP"

    On 08/08/06, Mark Davis <> wrote:
    > > but there are still many
    > common symbols that it would be useful to encode as characters, even
    > if there is not clear evidence of their use in a plain text context.
    > Here I disagree. If there is not strong evidence of their use in a
    > plain-text context, then we don't have any call for encoding them.

    I guess that most people know that I have always been a strong
    advocate of only encoding characters for which there is tangible
    evidence for their existence and need to be encoded. However, the
    nature of symbols mean that they may not commonly occur in plain text
    contexts, despite being widely occuring and very well known (e.g.
    Christian ichthys symbol or Chinese double happiness symbol). I
    believe that there is a utility in encoding widely occuring symbols,
    irrespective of their use in traditional text contexts, as many people
    would find it useful to be able to represent such symbols as
    characters rather than as images (primarily on web pages I imagine). I
    would therefore support applying less restrictive criteria for
    encoding *widely occuring* symbols.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Aug 09 2006 - 05:03:52 CDT