Re: Courtyard Codes and the Private Use Area (derives from Re: Encoding of symbols and a "lock"/"unlock" pre-proposal)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sat May 25 2002 - 07:38:16 EDT

At 14:23 -0700 2002-05-24, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:

>William, please start thinking of the PUA as the city dump. Everyone is glad
>it is there when you have to stick something somewhere, but no one really
>talks about it much and no one *ever* wants to take things out of it and
>strew it on their nice, clean characters.

What is the PUA for?

It is for private characters used by companies for internal
cross-mapping with earlier versions of their character sets and

It is for scripts which are not candidates for encoding that groups
of users want to exchange, or at least it is for ConScript.

It can be for people who wish to build a Unicode implementation for
an unencoded script to "practice" in. In that case when it comes to
encoding it would be possible to show the committees that it works.
This is NOT necessary, but might be nice for complex scripts.

That's what I think. Somehow it seems to me that MichKa and I are in
agreement here.... ;-)

Michael Everson *** Everson Typography ***

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat May 25 2002 - 06:17:30 EDT