On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 09:00:40PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > If that's the only thing about the Unicode charset that you find hateful
> > then you've not looked at it very hard.
> I find especially hateful people who whine about Unicode.
I think most people here think that Unicode is a Good Idea. It's just a
good idea badly implemented.
Putting a fucking snowman in the character set is Stupid. Then there's
the 'Floral Heart', U+2766, about a thousand different arrow symbols,
... Just look at all the shit in the Dingbats block! Sorry, but if you
want decorative symbols, pay a graphic designer for some graphics, they
do not belong in a character set.
Variable width characters are Stupid too.
> much more attentive to the whining once those who whine come up with
> anything even approximating the width and breadth of Unicode (dozens
> of scripts, hundreds of languages, thousands of glyphs), while still
> more or less successfully navigating the cultural/political murky
> waters. Those who whine should stick to their bloody A-Z and just
> shut up.
>
> Sorry, David, you hit a sore point there. Nothing personal.
Assuming for no good reason that I am a whiney little shit *is* kinda
personal. But I forgive you.
ObHate: replies sent both to me and to the list, because usually the
first one I get is the one sent directly to me, so its identical twin
gets shuffled off to Mr. Dave Null, and I miss the benefits of the
reply-to munging which I asked Siesta to do for me. Which means that
Jarkko is going to get two copies of this, with different msgids, and
one of them with this extra helping of vitriol.
--
David Cantrell | random organic glop and a metric fuckton of electricity
Languages for which ISO-Latin-$n is not necessary, #1 in a series:
Latin
