Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> Plane 14 PUA usage description tags? Naaah, nobody would suggest such
> a bizarre thing, would they?
Marco Cimarosti wrote:
>The three words "PUA usage description" are redundant, methinks. Removing
>them leaves a more concise and dramatic example of a weird proposal.
Extensions to Plane 14 to include subsets for all other 'alphabetic'
scripts, then encoding of ISO 639 and 3166 as separate code points so that
folks using 'non-alphabetic' scripts may identify languages and countries
using their own language at which point the "script for representing
language tags" created in 3.1 would remove the perception of using
"English-centric" and "ASCII-centric" scripts for language tagging within,
for example, the EUC which requires 'official' documentation in 12
languages and the UN which (used to, may still?) require 'official'
documentation in 5 languages.
Then there are all the numerous languages where the glyph associated with
the "abstract character" code point might be replaced by "sound-generating"
representations for those folks with only an oral tradition and no writing
system.
Maybe "UTF-8S" should be reserved now as an acronym for encoding code
points for "Sound-Glyphs"? ("Sound-bytes" might ignite the 'bits and
bytes' thread again.:-)
Bill Kurmey, Edmonton, AB, Canada
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:17:18 EDT