Standaridized variation sequences for the Desert alphabet?
wjgo_10009 at btinternet.com
Wed Mar 22 10:54:39 CDT 2017
>> If the user community needs to preserve the distinction in plain-text, then variation selection is the right approach.
> True. However, the user community is tiny, and I suspect that those variation selectors would never get used.
I do not use Deseret myself.
I opine that encoding the variation selector sequences would be good.
My reason for that opinion is because I opine that Unicode should provide for such situations where they are known to exist, even if the usage of the encoding may be very rare.
Am I correct in thinking that making use of such a variation selector encoding would be a font issue rather than an operating system issue?
Unicode is intended to be a long-lasting standardized system, so hopefully adding the variation selector sequences into The Unicode Standard now would provide support for a very long time.
Am I correct in thinking that the cost of adding the variation selector sequences into The Unicode Standard would be very small?
Wednesday 22 March 2017
More information about the Unicode