From: Christoph Päper (christoph.paeper@crissov.de)
Date: Fri Apr 08 2011 - 11:11:08 CDT
Shawn Steele:
> You could state that that's just a mapping, and ignore it, but what about Uno or other specialized card games? Especially ones that mostly use a normal deck with a few special cards?
Many of them could be unified, too.
“Unofication” would first require a mapping of colors to suits – such has been done for blue, red, green and yellow before, albeit differently: yellow (gold) is usually diamonds (coins) and hearts are red, but either clubs or spades usually remains black and which one that is differs between skat (green spades) and poker (green clubs and blue diamonds) 4-color decks, for instance. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-color_deck>
Second, the Tens would be unified with Uno-Zeros and Aces are already Ones (or you could add Ones and Elevens). You then would have to find matching cards for ‘wild’, ‘draw 2’, ‘draw 4’, ‘skip’ and ‘reverse’, but even if you came to the conclusion that it was necessary to introduce new ones, ‘wild’ and ‘skip’ could be unified with like cards from Phase 10, and you would have covered (after introducing unifications or nw codepoints for Elevens and Twelves) the two best-selling card games using proprietary decks.
Plain-text discussions of other (board) games could benefit from abstracted code points for two different types of generic cards (e.g. Chance and Community Chest in Monopoly), but I would reuse the Jokers.
I’m not sure we need this, though, and I believe such conventions could be established outside of Unicode by specialised font vendors using variation selectors or some similar technology.
FWIW, I think the modern/tarot unification was a good thing ad should remain.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 08 2011 - 11:16:44 CDT