Marco Cimarosti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now, my PuaInterpretation variable contains the following information: > > Foobar.ttf > > And my string contains the following text: > > > (U+E017 U+E009) > > Now, what's the next step? What am I supposed to do to find out whether, > according to the PUA interpretation called "Foobar.ttf", U+E017 and U+E009 > are letters or not?
Effectively, I don't like the idea of tagging PUA text with "font names tags". I'd rather prefer tagging the PUA text with "script name tags" (I mean the extended user-defined script codes like "x-klingon", followed by a base codepoint indicator and a codespace length like "x-klingon;b=E000;l=80): - this gives a real interpretation to PUAs, evaluated in their context, - it allows remapping them locally to other ranges in case of conflict between multiple PUA conventions uses - the script indicator name can be mapped locally to a character properties database, indexed at the relative codepoint in the PUA convention codespace. - any number of fonts can be designed to work with PUAs even if they are sharing conflicting codespaces. - any language can use this system. - no more need for extra planes - experimentation with new scripts still not standardized is possible, including for character properties, breaking behavior, layout, grapheme clustering, ... - emulation of new standardized scripts becomes possible on previous implementations that lack support for new characters or scripts...
