RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

[NeonEdge]

The problem as I see it, is not that the mechanism can't handle the languages,
it is that the Latin/Gothic countries chose first, and gave what's left to the
Oriental countries.

This is evident in the "Musical Symbols" and even "Byzantine Musical Symbols".
Are these character sets more important than the actual language character sets
being denied to the other countries? Are musical and mathematical symbols even
a language at all?

Yes, I understand that they are in the sense that they convey information, but
if Unicode is only trying to generically represent common use language, then
some of the characters (perhaps sets) should go. And if we go the other way and
say that this is intended to represent every sort of written, spoken, or
symbolic communication, then it really opens up the floodgates ("I need a
character for the men's room sign, please").

Here are some questions for English speakers to ask themselves about Unicode:
Are the original ascii graphical characters somehow more worthy of inclusion
than the Chinese characters?
Aren't Unicode 0xBD (the one-half character) and 1/2 the same?
When was the last time that you saw the cent sign on a computer?
When was the last time that you saw the cent sign anywhere?

It seems to me that Unicode, in it's present form, although a valiant attempt,
is just a 'better' ascii, and not a complete solution.

Grant M.