Re: U+2018 is not RIGHT HIGH 6

From: David Starner <>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 09:09:57 -0700

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Michael Probst <> wrote:
> It just makes more sense than giving a code point to a mere glyph
> variant (U+201F); or the other way round: If even that has been encoded
> already, the RIGHT HIGH 6 should have been before, and if it hasn't, it
> should be now.

I think there's exactly zero chance that Unicode will separate two
characters that have been unified for the entire history of Unicode
and used for terabytes, possibly petabytes, of data. Like many of the
things inherited from ASCII, this is just something that we'll have to
live with.

Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.
Received on Mon Apr 30 2012 - 11:13:02 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 30 2012 - 11:13:04 CDT