Assuming you were using any of those characters as "markup", how would you know when they were intentionally in the string and not part of your marking system?
-----Original Message----- From: Unicode <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Richard Wordingham via Unicode Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2019 4:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Unicode "no-op" Character? On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:50:49 -0400 Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode <[email protected]> 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.
