William, I think you have a unreasonable idea of what a standard actually is.
You have already made a standard and published it - I've seen all the posts at
the FCP forum. All you have to do is let people use it. If a user community is
going to exchange data, they will do so, and it just plain d
On Saturday 10 November 2012, John Knightley wrote:
> Whilst using the PUA is far from perfect at the end of the day it is better
> than the alternative of not using the PUA.
Yes. The Private Use Area is a very useful facility in that it allows
characters of one's own designation to be added
2012/11/10 john knightley :
> Whilst using the PUA is far from perfect at the end of the day it is
> better than the alternative of not using the PUA.
>
> Regards
> John
>
> On 10 Nov 2012 17:37, "William_J_G Overington"
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday 8 November 2012, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>>
>> >
Whilst using the PUA is far from perfect at the end of the day it is
better than the alternative of not using the PUA.
Regards
John
On 10 Nov 2012 17:37, "William_J_G Overington"
wrote:
> On Thursday 8 November 2012, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
> > 2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington> :
> > > Howeve
On Thursday 8 November 2012, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> 2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington> :
> > However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems
> > in being implemented as a widespread system.
> Wrong, this is what has been made during centuries if not millenium !
Well
On 11/9/2012 7:14 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
2012/11/9 Asmus Freytag :
Actually, there are certain instances where characters are encoded based on
expected usage. Currency symbols are a well known case for that, but there have
been instances of phonetic characters encoded in order to facilitate
2012/11/9 Asmus Freytag :
> Actually, there are certain instances where characters are encoded based on
> expected usage.
> Currency symbols are a well known case for that, but there have been
> instances of phonetic characters encoded in order to facilitate creation and
> publication of certain da
On 11/08/2012 09:00 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
On 11/8/2012 4:39 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
I stand by it: we don't encode what would be cool to have. We encode
what people *use*.
Actually, there are certain instances where characters are encoded
based on expected usage.
...
What these e
On 11/8/2012 4:39 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
On 11/08/2012 01:48 AM, William_J_G Overington wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
< ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
We don't encode "it would be nice/useful." We encode *characters*,
glyphs that people use (yes, I
On 11/08/2012 01:48 AM, William_J_G Overington wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
< ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
We don't encode "it would be nice/useful." We encode *characters*, glyphs that
people use (yes, I know I conflated glyphs and characters there.
I'm not sure I follow this analysis.
A./
On 11/8/2012 1:30 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington :
However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems in
being implemented as a widespread system.
Wrong, this is what has been made during centuries i
One key criteris for inclusion in Unicode is that a character or symbol be
in circulation. Whether these are hand written, printed or electronic. If
one creates a new a new character then one first must get others to use it,
this takes time.
John
On 8 Nov 2012 14:57, "William_J_G Overington"
wrot
2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington :
> However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems in
> being implemented as a widespread system.
Wrong, this is what has been made during centuries if not millenium !
Initially a private use definition, which was not "encoded", but foun
Michael Everson wrote:
< ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> We don't encode "it would be nice/useful." We encode *characters*, glyphs
> that people use (yes, I know I conflated glyphs and characters there.)
...
> Unicode isn't a system for encoding ratings.
14 matches
Mail list logo
