From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Thu Aug 06 2009 - 15:18:14 CDT

  • Next message: karl williamson: "Re: Wanted: synonyms for Age"

    On 8/6/2009 7:35 AM, Peter Constable wrote:
    > The only plausible reason for a new character would be to provide compatibility with a Japanese encoding standard in which two different JIS symbols were encoded. That's a minimal criterion, and it seems very unlikely to me that it would be realized. So, a glyph variant seems the only option for someone who really needs to encode and display the new JIS logo.
    Peter is correct in that adding a character would have to surmount some
    really substantial hurdles, because of the fact that UTC and WG2 have
    become more firm over time in their rejection of logos as encodable

    However, this loose talk about "glyph variants" spooks me. The
    *identity* of a logo is in its *appearance*, not in the organization it
    symbolizes. From a character encoding perspective, if the new logo looks
    different, then it's not a variant glyph of the logo encoded by the
    existing character, but a new, *unencoded* entity.

    Some logos have a single, fixed appearance (character and glyph are
    identical), others allow, at least in the typographical sense, of being
    rendered in boldface or perhaps italic, etc.. They remain recognizable,
    and many users might not even notice the variations, even if the owner
    wouldn't normally sanction their use.

    But claiming that both new and old version of some logo, no matter the
    difference in their design, are "glyph" variants of each other would
    assert that what is encoded is the owning organization. If fonts were
    created on that principle, then existing documents created with the
    "old" logo could one day be opened on another system and show the "new"
    logo. Or vice versa. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that such state
    of affairs would somehow violate the character encoding stability.

    A variation sequence wouldn't materially improve on that scenario,
    because the base character glyph can be substituted at any time.

    Now, for the existing character, it could be claimed that it does not
    actually represent the JIS logo, but a target location for cross mapping
    a certain code location from particular JIS standards. If JIS then
    updated all their standards so that the logo glyph is changed at that
    location, then, for Unicode to do likewise would seem to simply honor
    that cross-mapping semantics.

    However, that's not how Unicode has tracked other changes in JIS
    encodings in the past, so there's no reason to start with this character.

    So, a *private use character* seems the only option for someone who
    really needs to encode and display the new JIS logo.


    > Peter
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: [] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
    > Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 8:19 PM
    > To: Unicode Mailing List
    > Cc: António MARTINS-Tuválkin
    > António MARTINS-Tuválkin <antonio at tuvalkin dot web dot pt>
    >> At < >, a
    >> new symbol for JIS is shown and discussed. Will there be a new
    >> character in the Standard? (Not a new glyph in the same codepoint, I
    >> hope!!)
    > If this is a character, those should be glyph variants.
    > --
    > Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
    > ˆ

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 06 2009 - 15:22:19 CDT