From: Andrew West (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Apr 02 2011 - 16:16:43 CST
On 1 April 2011 21:27, Julian Bradfield <email@example.com> wrote:
> Of course, the same goes for mah-jong, playing cards, and all sorts
> of other junk in Unicode. That's not a reason to add more junk. Every
> added character makes a lot of work for anybody trying to provide
> complete coverage, or complete non-Han coverage.
That's one of the worst possible reasons not to encode new characters
that I've ever heard. If everyone had that attitude then Unicode
would never have taken off in the first place, and we'd be stuck with
ASCII because it is easier to support than Unicode.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 02 2011 - 16:20:13 CST