Michael Everson <ever...@evertype.com> wrote: < ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson <m...@kli.org> 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. It's a system for encoding what > people write and print. An interesting situation is that the British Library collects pure electronic publications by a system of voluntary deposit. A publisher sends an email to a specified email address with the pure electronic publication or publications attached to the email. The British Library sends, upon request, an email receipt for such deposited items. http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/stratpolprog/legaldep/index.html I have at various times, as research has progressed, deposited with the British Library pdf documents that I have produced and published and I have deposited with the British Library TrueType fonts that I have produced and published and I have received email receipts for them. Some of the pdf publications contain new symbols, used intermixed with text in a plain text situation. I have used Private Use Area encodings for the symbols. Yet the publications have not been published in hardcopy form. A problem that exists with the ISO/IEC 10646 encoding process, in my opinion, is that there is not a way for new symbols for electronic communication systems to be considered for encoding unless there is already widespread use of them using a Private Use Area encoding. However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems in being implemented as a widespread system. Also, I feel that implementation other than for research purposes using a Private Use Area encoding would cause problems for the future: I feel that a formal encoding is needed from the start. I feel that the rules for encoding such new symbols are out of date and not suitable for present day use. Unfortunately, it seems that there is not a way available for me to request formal consideration of the possibility of changing the rules. Technology has changed since the rules were made. Is it possible for formal consideration to be given to the possibility of changing the rules please? William Overington 8 November 2012
