On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:06:26AM +, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> The unintended usage of math alphanumerics in the real world is fairly
> widespread, at least in screen names.
On this topic, I was just pointed to
https://twitter.com/kentcdodds/status/1083073242330361856
βYou
On Thu 10 Jan, 2019, 20:49 Arthur Reutenauer via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org wrote:
>
> On this topic, I was just pointed to
>
> https://twitter.com/kentcdodds/status/1083073242330361856
>
> βYou π΅π©πͺπ―π¬ it's πΈππβ― to ππΏπΆππ² your tweets and usernames
> ππππ πππ. But
> have you π‘ππ¨π©ππ£ππ t
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:54:59PM +0530, Shriramana Sharma via Unicode wrote:
> On Thu 10 Jan, 2019, 20:49 Arthur Reutenauer via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org wrote:
>
> >
> > On this topic, I was just pointed to
> >
> > https://twitter.com/kentcdodds/status/1083073242330361856
> >
>
On 2019-01-10 4:41 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> That is pretty good actually and even a positive
> point for emoji (if these were mere images you
> would get nothing out of it without extra tagging,
> and it would still lack the standardization).
> Nothing like what one gets from the math symbols
On 2019-01-10 11:27 PM, wjgo_10...@btinternet.com wrote:
Yesterday I wrote as follows.
I suggest that a solution to the problem would be to encode a
COMBINING ITALICIZER character, such that it only applies to the
character that it immediately follows. So, for example, to make the
word aprico
Oops.Β Sorry for the inadvertent copy/paste duplication.
Yesterday I wrote as follows.
I suggest that a solution to the problem would be to encode a
COMBINING ITALICIZER character, such that it only applies to the
character that it immediately follows. So, for example, to make the
word apricot become displayed in italics one would use seven COMBININ
On 1/10/19 6:43 PM, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
The first step would be to persuade the "powers that be" that italics
are needed.Β That seems presently unlikely.Β There's an entrenched
mindset which seems to derive from the fact that pre-existing
character sets were based on mechanical type
Mark E. Shoulson wrote,
> A perhaps more affirmative step, not necessarily first
> but maybe, would be to write up a proposal and submit
> it through channels so the "powers that be" can
> respond officially.
Indeed.Β And a preliminary step might be to float the concept on the
public list and
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 23:43:46 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> The second step would be to persuade Unicode to encode a new
> character rather than simply using an existing variation selector
> character to do the job.
Actually, this might be a superior option.
Richard.
Richard Wordingham responded,
>> ... simply using an existing variation
>> selector character to do the job.
>
> Actually, this might be a superior option.
For the V.S. option there should be a provision for consistency and
open-endedness to keep it simple.Β Start with VS14 and work backwards
I've been advised off-list that my attempt to make an analogy with CJK
doesn't sit well.
It's fair to say that ideographic variation sequences are for plain-text
representation of material which isn't suitable for atomic encoding.Β An
analogy can be drawn from that situation to the situatio
On 2019/01/11 10:48, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Is it true that many of the CJK variants now covered were previously
> considered by the Consortium to be merely stylistic variants?
What is a stylistic variant or not is quite a bit more complicated for
CJK than for scripts such as Latin. In
13 matches
Mail list logo
