Re: Obsolete characters

From: David Starner (
Date: Sat Jan 17 2009 - 20:00:45 CST

  • Next message: James Cloos: "Re: Proposed (MC) Marque de Commerce and/or (MD) Marque Depose?"

    On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Mark Davis <> wrote:
    > Identifiers don't just mean programmatic identifiers.

    That and other short strings for entry into computer. Usernames,
    passwords, URLs, etc.

    > If you look at UTR#36
    > and UTR#39, you see that they are concerned with security. One of the issues
    > is visual confusability. Knowing that characters are archaic allows you to
    > flag an occurrence as something that you may want to alert users about,
    > especially if the characters are visually confusable with others. I should
    > not have used the term 'exclude'.

    I don't see where that's useful; given 3ƷʒȜȝ℥³③⑶⒊⓷❸➂➌3����� (the last
    are the mathematical numbers in plane 1, since I don't know if they
    came through correctly), when do you ever want to pull only Ȝȝ out for

    > Secondly, there is no denying that some characters,
    > languages, scripts *are* archaic -- otherwise I'd be composing this message
    > in Anglo-Saxon. Not unless you want to be so PC as to deny reality.

    No, but you also aren't composing this message in Clallam or Kawaiisu;
    frankly, I find it vastly more likely that I'll find a message in my
    email in Anglo-Saxon than in one of those languages, and more likely
    than even such a vibrant language as Skolt Sami.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 17 2009 - 20:02:48 CST