Re: Hexadecimal digits

From: Luke-Jr (
Date: Sat Jun 05 2010 - 13:07:31 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Hexadecimal digits"

    On Saturday 05 June 2010 12:59:34 pm Rick McGowan wrote:
    > On 6/5/2010 10:42 AM, Doug Ewell wrote, responding to Luke-jr:
    > >> "Draft" characters would be ones which are not final and can be
    > >> removed or replaced in the future, if they don't in the meantime gain
    > >> popularity within some reasonable timeframe.
    > >
    > > There is no precedent for this in either Unicode or ISO/IEC 10646. If
    > > you think it has been difficult persuading people that your characters
    > > should be encoded in the existing framework, just try suggesting a
    > > basic architectural change like this.
    > Speaking only with my person opinion on this one poin: Doug is right.
    > This won't happen. Once you have characters in real usage because a
    > standard was released that contains them, even if the standard called
    > them "draft", you'd have data "in the wild" that could potentially
    > become non-conformant.

    And the alternative is data "in the wild" that never had a chance to be
    conformant because the standard makes them impossible.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 05 2010 - 13:09:01 CDT