Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

From: Michael Everson <>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:22:00 +0100

On 4 Apr 2017, at 00:59, Richard Wordingham <> wrote:

> No, he wants two characters WHITE CHESS KNIGHT and WHITE CHESS KNIGHT ON DARK BACKGROUND, and a variation selector, say VS2, that when applied to them yields a glyph that works with block elements.
> It might be simpler if WHITE CHESS KNIGHT ON DARK BACKGROUND was defined as a character that worked with block elements.

I can’t fathom how you would configure a font to do whatever it is you think you’re describing here. I don’t follow it. “worked with which block elements, to do what?

If it’s draw a box around the board, I already said, the answer is to change the graphics terminal block elements because in a chess-font environment their positional function is used, not their graphics terminal glyph.

>> Then you’re still stuck for a solution for non-em-square characters for inline text.
> No, WHITE CHESS KNIGHT should continue to fulfil that role. My only worry is that one might need a variation selector, say VS1, to force the choice of a suitable glyph.

I don’t get what you’re on about. I’ve already solved this problem, and whatever it is you’re describing sure doesn’t sound intuitive.

I’ve shown my implementations which do what I need them to do. I don’t know if you can do the same, but go ahead and make your font to prove it, and write it up clearly in a counter-proposal if you think it’s the right way to .

Michael Everson
Received on Mon Apr 03 2017 - 19:22:19 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 03 2017 - 19:22:19 CDT