On 1/10/19 6:43 PM, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
>
> The first step would be to persuade the "powers that be" that italics
> are needed. That seems presently unlikely. There's an entrenched
> mindset which seems to derive from the fact that pre-existing
> character sets were based on mechanical typewriting technology and
> were further limited by the maximum number of glyphs in primitive
> computer fonts.
>
> The second step would be to persuade Unicode to encode a new character
> rather than simply using an existing variation selector character to
> do the job.
A perhaps more affirmative step, not necessarily first but maybe, would
be to write up a proposal and submit it through channels so the "powers
that be" can respond officially.
~mark
Received on Thu Jan 10 2019 - 18:28:22 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jan 10 2019 - 18:28:22 CST