@ John D Burger:
And out of the sudden a war wages what counts as good editor. :D
@ Andre Schappo:
That's a good idea. We need it in the name of science and education. :D
William_J_G Overington:
> Hi
>
> You might like the following post.
>
> http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2010-m06/0001.html
>
> William
>
Hi, I'm really not sure what this is about, but it seems like an
interface to deliver instructions to the rendering VM?
Martin v. Löwis:
> So if you can't demonstrate usage, you should at least demonstrate
> demand (rather than just claiming that there might be demand).
The problem is, you can't do that with the topic at hand.
Because most programmers don't even see the possibilities.
It's like asking a blind what colors look like. Although that may sound
kind of arrogant.
Among language designers and people interested in stuff like this, there
is only a small fraction that doesn't hold the ill-minded opinion that
syntax doesn't matter at all.
Among those who care for syntax there is only a small fraction that
really knows enough about Unicode. And who can blame them, I still see
broken characters on a weekly base.
Among those there is only a small fraction that cares enough.
Among those there is only a small fraction that has the nerves/balls to
put up with a consortium.
This small subset is a handful of people, like André, me and maybe 3
other persons.
I don't really feel comfortable to sound that elitist, but in this case
I dare say that the consortium shouldn't care for established
popularity, the same way they should have handled emoji characters.
Best regards
A. Z.
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
Unicode_at_unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
Received on Mon Feb 09 2015 - 11:54:54 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Feb 09 2015 - 11:54:55 CST