From: John Hudson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jul 16 2007 - 13:06:01 CDT
Brian Wilson wrote:
> I probably have this all wrong, but aren't there 65,536 possible characters in Unicode?
Many more than that, thanks to various extension mechanisms.
> Why not have a section of 48 characters for generic bases. Encode the 10 characters that John Hudson recommends. All of the generic bases would be in one section of unicode and there would be plenty of room for expansion. That saves us ignorant people from wondering, "now which 'x-like' symbol do I use for Lao again"?
This is quite a good idea. It would enable layout engine developers to make a safe
assumption about the reserved codepoints, so that generic base characters added to Unicode
at a later date could be automatically supported without needing updates to the layout
engines. And it would also remove any ambiguity as to what character codes should be used
to encode generic bases.
-- Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Gulf Islands, BC email@example.com We say our understanding measures how things are, and likewise our perception, since that is how we find our way around, but in fact these do not measure. They are measured. -- Aristotle, Metaphysics
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 16 2007 - 13:17:15 CDT