Re: PETSCII mapping?

From: Rebecca T <>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:25:52 -0400

> If there's a credible need to convert files between Unicode-based systems
> those using PETSCII

There is! It’s called “sharing textual information” and it’s how our society
functions. Can we afford to blithely abandon data from the best selling
computer in history [1] because nobody cared to standardize its?

> A similar scenario might exist if C64 emulators run on Unicode-based
> were a widespread phenomenon

They do! Even last month, there was a PETSCII directory-art contest. [2]

A bit off-topic, but:

As time goes on, “not in widespread use” will become a flimsier and flimsier
argument against inclusion — why isn’t there a larger community of PETSCII
enthusaists? Partially because the only way to share PETSCII is through
The consortium (passively or actively) prevents communication through
and then uses the lack of communication as a justification against
inclusion —
it’s a poor, tautological argument, and it won’t serve the consortium

Simply put, we need new criteria for inclusion — as the vast majority of the
world’s systems (from written communication in text messages to the
of all new books) are already Unicode-based, we can no longer rely on a
character’s existing presence outside of Unicode as a signal to warrent
inclusion; we must weigh a character’s merits and usability on its own.
it fill a gap in communication? Will it be used?)

Received on Wed Apr 05 2017 - 16:26:17 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Apr 05 2017 - 16:26:17 CDT