Re: RTL PUA?

On 8/19/2011 5:50 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> If there was a group that got together and developed the necessary
> protocol, and then found that there's some provision in the Unicode
> standard that provides an undue limitation on some use of private use
> characters for which there's a demonstrated demand, that would be the
> time to approach the UTC to fix any deficiencies in the private nature
> of the PUA characters.
>

I think Asmus has hit the nail on the head here.

Just one other note. I've been wading through this thread to see if
anybody else
caught this, but apparently not. Folks who have been advocating adding
*new* sets
of private use characters (with bc=R, or anything else in the way of
property
default values) seem to have overlooked an important Unicode stability
policy:

    The *General_Category* property value *Private_Use (Co)* is
    immutable: the set of code points with that value will never change.

That stability policy has been applicable ever since Unicode 2.0. And my
sense is that the
UTC would be completely uninterested in tampering with it.

So folks may be unhappy with the difficulty of making private use code
points
do what they want to do with them, but arguing to add more of them to
somehow
fix that problem isn't going to go anywhere.

There are 131,068 private use code points in the standard. That is all
there ever
will be.

--Ken
Received on Fri Aug 19 2011 - 20:21:10 CDT