From: Leo Broukhis (leob@mailcom.com)
Date: Fri Jan 02 2009 - 01:23:22 CST
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 10:29 PM, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> wrote:
> There's an oxymoronic problem here that isn't sustainable in the long run: public interchange using private-use encodings. Either public interchange is not assumed to be possible, or the private-use area is no longer really private. If public interchange *is* happening in text protocols, then the de facto reality is that there are (abstract) characters* involved that are potential candidates for encoding in the Universal Character Set.
Would it be possible to solve this problem by designating a set of
"telecom compatibility characters"
without going into the details of their semantics in the canonical
character names,
so that each TELECOM COMPATIBILITY CHARACTER NNN
will be standardized as "NNN" drawn in a distinctive way, but in
practice a multitude of "fantasy" fonts
(or rather picture banks) of varying colorization and animation will be used?
Leo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:29:59 CST