2011/8/25 Andrew Cunningham <lang.support_at_gmail.com>:
> so you will end up with the CSUR AND the registry Philippe is
> suggesting AND all the existing uses of PUA that will not end up in
> CSUR or the other registry.
>
> sounds like it will be a mess.
>
> its bad enough dealing with Unicode and pseudo-Unicode in the Myanmar
> script, adding PUA potentially into the mix .... ummm...
Where did someone speak about the Myanmar script case ? MAy be you're
now the source of this mix.
And anyway I've not said that the CSUR project, or a putative project
to help the UCS encoding process are the only options for using PUAs.
And not all PUA usages need to be coordinated:
- in East Asia, PUAs are frequently used only for personal reasons, in
a purely creative way (for example in personal ideographs), only for
the final purpose of creating something else that will be communicated
with others, and which will not be necessarily plain text.
- people can encode their own photos or colorful drawings in a PUA, if
they want it for their own uses... They don"t require the
authorization or approval from others.
- applications may internally use their own PUAs as a simple part of
their implementation, to make it work and produce the results wanted,
without having to even expose how this internal use is effectively
defined (others may try to investigate, by reverse engineering, or the
application author may change this representation at any time, or
remove it by using some other solutions, it should not matter).
However, I am still convinced that the coordinated uses of PUAs is
justified by the desire to create something else, as a temporary
working tool, which can be justified by the current limitations of
existing standards in their defined scope (including policies) or in
their initially expected usage. In that case, PUAs are a very useful
transition mechanism.
Received on Wed Aug 24 2011 - 21:49:22 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Aug 24 2011 - 21:49:33 CDT