Re: unicode Digest V5 #149

From: Patrick Andries (patrick.andries@xcential.com)
Date: Sun Jun 19 2005 - 11:53:28 CDT

  • Next message: Curtis Clark: "Re: unicode Digest V5 #149"
    Doug Ewell a écrit : 
    Patrick Andries wrote:

  
    Bold, italics, underlining, changes in font size and style, etc. are
all used for pedagogical and other communicative purposes.  But they
are not plain text either.
      
    And this is why it should not be possible to use these techniques in
contextualized or cursive texts with modern days fonts (or cursors
apparently for Tamil split vowels whose colour one would want to
change to highlight them by first selecting them which is often not
possible)?
    
    
No, this is why it is not a Unicode problem.
    I thought we had already adressed this: it is an issue related to Unicode (for instance if the tagging [of colour]  stops the contextualization) and such things have been discussed on this list.

    I find this repeated call to "plain text" rather unhelpful : a series of issues are related and should be solved to make the set of technologies that use Unicode work and should provide a service. It is unhelful to withdraw and say it's the other technology's problem. You may not be interested in some problems and discussions (as I do for many on this lits), but others  may well want to learn or see how better intermixing of technologies based on Unicode could evolve.


    P. A.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 19 2005 - 11:55:03 CDT