Re: proposal for a "Standard-Exit" or "Namespace" character

From: Dennis Heuer (dh@triple-media.com)
Date: Mon Apr 13 2009 - 20:06:28 CDT

  • Next message: Dennis Heuer: "Re: proposal for a "Standard-Exit" or "Namespace" character"

    Many thanks for the quick answers, and for the links. btw. i get all
    emails three times. does this mailing list obey to this weird
    'group-reply' religion???

    however, i didn't understand the ISO-2022 standard in full in this
    short time. but this is also just underlining my proposal. ISO-2022
    tries to do some many things at once a very dominating way. this is not
    what i mean or what i ever wanted to use. what i mean is that there
    should be a simple switch key, possibly defining how many characers in
    follow specify the new character space (16bit is enough, i think.)
    that's it. and, for the character set recognition, one could even use a
    more flexible algorithm that doesn't recognize by size but by content.

    the character-space key should not be the escape key for 'good
    reasons' (i prefer hints or links instead of those comments, btw.).
    it's always the escape key! i think the escape key dreams of escaping
    its special role every night. the escape key is used most ambiguously
    of all common characters.

    escape codes are ambiguous too because of the many existing. this is
    why unicode specifies that 'if' ISO-2022 is used (...). this is not
    what i mean. i mean a special character that, in all cases, states that
    now another character set is used and the program will not be capable
    of printing senseful text if it doesn't support character spaces. this
    shall be clear and always valid up to eternity and by no means
    relativated by an 'if'. the character is not to be used otherwise, and
    the program may print an error. escape sequences, instead, are
    generally just filtered out.

    also, and i wrote that already, i doubt that unicode will ever be the
    only character set in use. this target, specifically considering all the
    fancy characters, is fully illusionary. and, as i already wrote,
    unicode itself would profit from keeping new code blocks outside the
    official character set until some years of critique have passed them.
    this makes sense if you think a bit longer about it.

    reagrds,
    dennis

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 13 2009 - 20:08:31 CDT