On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 03:48:48PM -0800, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
> Variation selectors are ONLY allowed for specific characters and therefore
> the proposal given here is not possible or sensible (there are not narrow
> and wide varities of any of the characters currently being considered for
> usage with variation selectors.
>
> SIDE NOTE: The fact that this discussion is going on would perhaps be
> further proof that variation selectors are opening up a can of worms we do
> not want to be opened...
As a member of the list, let me point out this is considered neccesary
to properly support preexisting charsets. (The given purpose is to allow
charset emulation software so you can run a legacy locale on a purely
Unicode xterm.) If it's not done through a Unicode character, it will be
done through a terminal escape sequence. It's not a completely spurious
request - the right layer just needs to be found to support it.
-- David Starner - starner@okstate.edu, dvdeug/jabber.com (Jabber) Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org What we've got is a blue-light special on truth. It's the hottest thing with the youth. -- Information Society, "Peace and Love, Inc."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 01:26:10 EST