Re: Codespace Anxiety Redux (was: Re: Level of Unicode support required ...)

Quoting David Starner <[email protected]>:

> On 11/2/07, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

> If you need more than
> the available number of code points, there's always ways to hack it
> in, but I think it's in Unicode's interest to stop people who want to
> use more than 130 thousand characters. Almost always, they want to
> encode a complete mapping to some other standard that duplicates part
> of Unicode, and forcing them through hoops or into their own character
> encoding makes it clearer that they aren't real Unicode files.
>

But it this case it is not because of mapping to another stanard, but  
simply doing what unicode suggests should be done with seldom used  
scripts or characters, namely placing them in the PUA whilst deciding  
which are suitable for encoding. Take the attached jpeg of a  
character, it can be described as a variant of U+28DF6, however  
according to the unicode standard to put it in a font as U+28DF6 would  
be wrong. If submitted to unicode this charcter would be given a  
seperate codepoint. Only unifiable variants of a character can have  
the same codepoint, therefore to be unicode compliant the character  
must be encoded some other way, say in the PUA. Does anyone else have  
suggestions for fonts that include such characters apart from putting  
them in the PUA?

BTW just to be different this is a Jing character included in a large  
volume of Guangxi songs published in 1994. U+28DF6 is Chu nom and  
means door.

Regards
John

-------------------------------------------------
This message sent through Virus Free Email
http://www.vfemail.net