Re: Character proposal: SUBSCRIPT TEN

From: Mark Davis (mark.davis@icu-project.org)
Date: Fri Jan 18 2008 - 10:12:23 CST

  • Next message: Leo Broukhis: "Re: Character proposal: LOWER TEN"

    We only encode new characters when there is no way to represent the
    characters otherwise in Unicode. In some cases, a single character in the
    source set maps to a sequence in Unicode. For this particular case, it is
    unclear to me why the sequence

    U+2081 <http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/character.jsp?a=2081> ( ₁ )
    SUBSCRIPT ONE
    U+2080 <http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/character.jsp?a=2080> ( ₀ )
    SUBSCRIPT ZERO

    is not sufficient.

    Mark

    On Jan 18, 2008 5:36 AM, <vunzndi@vfemail.net> wrote:

    > Quoting Leo Broukhis <leob@mailcom.com>:
    >
    > > On Jan 16, 2008 1:42 PM, Kenneth Whistler <kenw@sybase.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >> GOST 10859 and ALCOR were effectively dead encodings long before
    > >> Unicode even got started collecting repertoire,
    > >
    > > It might seem funny, but I've heard of operational BESM-6 machines
    > > (that used the GOST encoding)
    > > somewhere in Russia as recently as last year on some military
    > > installation - where it's easier to keep paying for
    > > maintenance, electricity and cooling rather have a headache upgrading
    > > the system.
    >
    > >
    > > Does it look more convincing now?
    > >
    >
    >
    > In many respects the above says enough - this is a legacy encoding
    > issue, such things should be encoded. It would seem that GOST 10859
    > like most legacy systems is still being used by someone.
    >
    >
    >
    > John Knightley
    >
    >
    >
    > -------------------------------------------------
    > This message sent through Virus Free Email
    > http://www.vfemail.net
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    -- 
    Mark
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 18 2008 - 10:15:26 CST