From: Peter Constable (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 02 2009 - 11:32:10 CST
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Leo Broukhis
> 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?
Well, it would be possible to encode characters with such names, though it's not clear how that would be better: either the semantics of each given character NNN would be documented *outside* the Unicode and ISO 10646 standards, or there would be no basis for any interchange. Either way, the purpose of encoding the characters in these standards seems to be defeated.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:29:59 CST