On Friday, 24 October 2025 at 23:57, [email protected] via Unicode <[email protected]> wrote:
> How is it a “proper explanation,” to make a claim that the issues 'can be > solved by using appropriate fonts' when the proposal already makes it clear > that they can't? If my understanding is correct, the meaning is: if you use a font that makes those Unicode characters look like they did on their original platform, there is no issue. But a given font can only emulate one platform at a time. You're not going to get a C64 and PET/VIC-20 frankenstein of a document. Take your pick: do you want it to look like C64, or do you want it to look like PET/VIC-20? Choose your font accordingly. If fonts still don't solve this the way I just described, you have not yet given an example of this. As for the HP 264x '2' vs '8', I will admit I have never heard of this before, but it seems to me that the '8' is only ever used in the diagonal of the capital N, and the '2' seems to connect identically on the right and even better on the top. I am not sure why the '8' exists at all, but in any case, you haven't shown instance where the '2' can't fill its place. - Nitai Sasson (for all intents and purposes, just some guy)
