Re: Unicode operators [Was: Re: UTF-8 and Unicode FAQ, demos]

[Michael Lazzaro]

As one of the instigators of this thread, I submit that we've probably argued about the Unicode stuff enough. The basic issues are now known, and it's known that there's no general agreement on any of this stuff, nor will there ever be. To wit:

-- Extended glyphs might be extremely useful in extending the operator table in non-ambiguous ways, especially for "advanced" things like «op»..

-- Many people loathe the idea, and predict newcomers will too.

-- Many mailers & older platforms tend to react badly for both viewing and inputting.

-- If extended characters are used at all, the decision needs to be made whether they shall be least-common-denominator Latin1, UTF-8, or full Unicode, and if there are backup spellings so that everyone can play.

It's up to Larry, and he knows where we're all coming from. Unless anyone has any _new_ observations, I propose we pause the debate until a decision is reached?

MikeL