> It would have the advantage of suppressing those names from the
> proposed table for UTR #25 (characters used in Mathematical
> notations).
> 
> In the merged name aliases table, we could as well include :
> - SGML/HTML/XML character entity names (and some standardized synonyms) ?

HTML character entity names would be nice to have, but it would rather
make sense to have them in a separate file.

> - Postscript names (from AGL), also used in the "name" table of
> TrueType/OpenType fonts
> - possibly even their Postscript numeric id's (the 256 first names
> from the AGL list is not even stored in fonts, where they are bound
> only by string id).

I don't see why these should go into the unicode tables...

> - other names from candidate standards ?

What I'm really missing is the "filename" of the latest ("authoritative")
proposal appropriate for the character. I think even that unicode
should publish officially and for the broader these proposal as
they are very good starting point for people who wish to learn more
about particular codepoint / script.

> -- Philippe.

-- 
Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
Jabber: but...@jabbim.cz

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Reply via email to