Doug Ewell wrote:
> > plane-14 tag characters
>
> I liked the idea at first, but there's a problem: the use of
> privately constructed PUA registries turns the PUA into a
> kind of ISO IR, just the sort of thing Unicode worked so
> hard to avoid.
Yes, and that will effectively be avoided for *encoded* characters.
But, for unencoded characters, people wishing to use them may prefer to take
this burden (in *their* text files and *their* applications, not yours or
mine), rather than building their own encoding system from scratch.
Anyway, what's the alternative? Font hacks? In-line pictures?
> Plus, neither the Unicode Consortium nor ISO/IEC 10646 would
> have anything to do with maintaining the list of registry
> indices, so that too would have be managed privately.
Of course. We are only discussing possible ways for doing this private
management in an orderly and organized fashion.
I agree that no particular usage of PUA should ever become obligatory or
forbidden, but this doesn't mean that there should not be guidelines or
tools to do it.
> Of course, there's also the problem of religious opposition
> to Plane 14 tags.
Well, as far as possible, any religious (op)position should be tolerated in
a free society. :-)
> The language tag U+E0001 was DOA (deprecated on arrival),
> and judging from Peter Constable's "Gack!!!" there is a
> genuine contempt among some for the entire concept of
> plain-text tags (i.e. it's not just an objection to
> language tagging, as I was previously led to believe).
A well motivated "gack!!!", methinks.
Probably, plane-14 tags should never have been there. But, once the chicken
is dead, the only thing left to do is having chicken for dinner... So why
not using those tags for more services, provided that there is no disturb to
(the majority of9 applications that just prefer to ignore them?
_ Marco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:17:16 EDT