Re: Amusing use of Unicode

From: Adam Twardoch (
Date: Fri Mar 13 2009 - 12:15:55 CST

  • Next message: John Burger: "Re: Amusing use of Unicode"

    John Burger wrote:
    > then it would be very difficult to reliably write them down and enter
    > them later.

    Of course, that is a good question. Is machine-readable code (which a
    URL actually is) always required to be human-readable? The "tiny" URLs
    are rarely really human-readable, even if just the plain English letters
    and digits are used. It's a bit like those software serial numbers: it's
    still easy to confuse 1 with l, 0 with O, or 8 with B — and there is no
    human context to make sense out of it.

    When it comes to writing down and typing later, this:
    is still much better than this:
    or this:

    I think human-readable URLs don't need to be tiny, and tiny URLs don't
    need to be human-readable. They follow two different goals but sure,
    they can co-exist.


    Adam Twardoch
    | Language Typography Unicode Fonts OpenType
    | | |
    I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or
    insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
    (Hunter S. Thompson)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 13 2009 - 12:18:30 CST