Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at google dot com> wrote:
>> I was specifically, and only, referring to a character proposal—any
>> proposal—being dubbed "urgent" on the basis that a font hack has been
>> identified.
>
> Just look what happened when the Japanese did their own font/character
> set hack. The backslash/yen problem is still with us, to this day...
Again, I am not suggesting that such characters not be encoded, only
that the presence of font hacks not be used as a primary driver of
"urgency." Is is desirable to release a new minor version of Unicode
with ONE new character because someone distributes a hacked font?
I'm sure that if Michael were to develop and distribute a font that
replaced Latin-1 glyphs with Unifon glyphs, that would not
single-handedly drive the urgency of encoding Unifon.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell Received on Tue May 29 2012 - 15:04:31 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue May 29 2012 - 15:04:31 CDT