Re: structured unicode

Looks like something like this would be handy for a lots of stuff. The 
only thing I don't like is using backticks for string literals. Using 
double quotes is obviously preferable for parsing source code. I'd say 
string literals appear far more in source code than quotations appear 
in prose (well.. at least the kind of documents that are likely to be 
marked up with structured unicode). TeX users are already used to using 
backticks and single quotes to create double quotes in their documents 
anyway.

-Brian

On May 6, 2004, at 4:45 AM, Adam Megacz wrote:

> Hey, I'd like to hear what people think of this.  Conveniently, it
> falls in the intersection of my Ibex work (IbexDoc) and my schoolwork.
>
>   http://www.structured-unicode.org/spec.pdf
>
> I'm going to change the name; I found out that Unicode is trademarked,
> and, to be honest, this isn't really part of the Unicode spec.
>
>   - a
>
> -- 
> "Truth is One, though the Sages know it as Many."    -- Rig Veda
>
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/core
>