On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:50:49 -0400 Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> If faced with the same problem today, I’d > probably just go with U+FEFF (really only need a single char, not a > whole delimited substring) or a different C0 control (maybe SI/LS0) > and clean up the string if it needs to be presented to the user. You'd really want an intelligent choice between U+FEFF (ZWNBSP) (better U+2060 WJ) and U+200B (ZWSP). > I still think an “idle”/“null tag”/“noop” character would be a neat > addition to Unicode, but I doubt I can make a convincing enough case > for it. You'd still only be able to insert it between characters, not between code units, unless you were using UTF-32. Richard.