On 03/02/2004 10:44, Peter Constable wrote:

So, for example, in Jaguar I had been using a PUA-based cuneiform font
for file and folder names...



New concept: filenames where the human-readable name is a user preference depending on the individual's PUA assignments.



Presumably these filenames are intended only for internal use within a community of users who have agreed on a set of PUA assignments, whether a cuneiform set or the SIL allocations we have been discussing. What if the SIL team working on the Melpa language wants to assign filenames according to the words in that language, including double-barred L? Might it not seem rather sensible of them to use the (SIL PUA) codes F20E and F20F, generated by their keyboards and displayed with their fonts? The rest of the world might not be able to read the filenames correctly, but why do they need to care about the rest of the world? After all, only a few years ago Russian users were in a worse position, they could use Russian characters in filenames in Windows 9x, but for the rest of the world those filenames were not just illegible, they were often treated as illegal. There may be fewer speakers of Melpa than of Russian, but the principle is similar.

There's progress for you.



It is progress when a system does what you want it to do rather than deciding for you what you ought to be doing. You may not think what Dean and his colleagues were doing was very sensible, but it obviously made sense to them, so what was the point of banning it?


-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) http://www.qaya.org/




Reply via email to