the proposal would contradict the goals of variation selectors and would pollute ther variation sequences registry (possibly even creating conflicts). And if we admit it for italics, than another VSn will be dedicated to bold, and another for monospace, and finally many would follow for various style modifiers. Finally we would no longer have enough variation selectors for all requests). And what we would have made was only trying to reproduce another existing styling standard, but very inefficiently (and this use wil be "abused" for all usages, creating new implementation constraints and contradicting goals with existing styling languages: they would then decide to make these characters incompatible for use in conforming applications. The Unicode encoding would have lost all its interest. I do not support the idea of encoding generic styles (applicable to more than 100k+ existing characters) using variation selectors. Their goal is only to allow semantic distinctions when two glyphs were unified in one language may occasionnaly (not always) have some significance in specific languages. But what you propose would apply to all languages, all scripts, and would definitely reserve some the the few existing VSn for this styling use, blocking further registration of needed distinctions (VSn characters are notably needed for sinographic scripts to properly represent toponyms or person names, or to solve some problems existing with generic character properties in Unicode that cannot be changed because of stability rules).
Le jeu. 31 janv. 2019 à 16:32, wjgo_10...@btinternet.com via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> a écrit : > Is the way to try to resolve this for a proposal document to be produced > for using Variation Selector 14 in order to produce italics and for the > proposal document to be submitted to the Unicode Technical Committee? > > If the proposal is allowed to go to the committee rather than being > ruled out of scope, then we can know whether the Unicode Technical > Committee will allow the encoding. > > William Overington > > Thursday 31 January 2019 > >