Re: Codespace Anxiety Redux (was: Re: Level of Unicode support required ...)

Date: Fri Nov 02 2007 - 14:53:52 CST

  • Next message: James Kass: "Re: Tamil Sri / Shri"

    Quoting David Starner <>:

    > On 11/2/07, <> wrote:

    > If you need more than
    > the available number of code points, there's always ways to hack it
    > in, but I think it's in Unicode's interest to stop people who want to
    > use more than 130 thousand characters. Almost always, they want to
    > encode a complete mapping to some other standard that duplicates part
    > of Unicode, and forcing them through hoops or into their own character
    > encoding makes it clearer that they aren't real Unicode files.

    But it this case it is not because of mapping to another stanard, but
    simply doing what unicode suggests should be done with seldom used
    scripts or characters, namely placing them in the PUA whilst deciding
    which are suitable for encoding. Take the attached jpeg of a
    character, it can be described as a variant of U+28DF6, however
    according to the unicode standard to put it in a font as U+28DF6 would
    be wrong. If submitted to unicode this charcter would be given a
    seperate codepoint. Only unifiable variants of a character can have
    the same codepoint, therefore to be unicode compliant the character
    must be encoded some other way, say in the PUA. Does anyone else have
    suggestions for fonts that include such characters apart from putting
    them in the PUA?

    BTW just to be different this is a Jing character included in a large
    volume of Guangxi songs published in 1994. U+28DF6 is Chu nom and
    means door.


    This message sent through Virus Free Email


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 02 2007 - 14:56:22 CST