On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 03:48:48PM -0800, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote: > Variation selectors are ONLY allowed for specific characters and therefore > the proposal given here is not possible or sensible (there are not narrow > and wide varities of any of the characters currently being considered for > usage with variation selectors. > > SIDE NOTE: The fact that this discussion is going on would perhaps be > further proof that variation selectors are opening up a can of worms we do > not want to be opened...
As a member of the list, let me point out this is considered neccesary to properly support preexisting charsets. (The given purpose is to allow charset emulation software so you can run a legacy locale on a purely Unicode xterm.) If it's not done through a Unicode character, it will be done through a terminal escape sequence. It's not a completely spurious request - the right layer just needs to be found to support it. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED], dvdeug/jabber.com (Jabber) Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org What we've got is a blue-light special on truth. It's the hottest thing with the youth. -- Information Society, "Peace and Love, Inc."
