[skipping past various grandiloquence...] > Having worked so hard (sweating long years at other sources of income) to > fund the price of developing fonts and attending mtgs to define not just > individual 10646/Unicode characters, but whole character blocks within > 10646/Unicode, plus a series of 8859 sets to serve my country and her near > neighbours, as well as at drafting some relevant IS (Irish Standards), it > seems crazy that all that work is being thrown away (because such defined > character sets, it seems, are no longer being used, dropped from > referencing 'Unicode-savvy' software).
*ahem* The "8859 set[s] to serve [Ireland] and her near neighbours" is: ISO/IEC 8859-14 Latin alphabet No. 8 (Celtic) The letter i in that encoded character set is 0x69 U+0069 LATIN SMALL LETTER I. Hmm. Seems to me that we've seen that particular animal before, since it is also U+0069 LATIN SMALL LETTER I in ISO/IEC 10646 and in the Unicode Standard. We are talking about the *same* character here, whether it be in 10646, in Unicode, in 8859-14, or in a defined European subset of 10646. The fault, dear Marion, is not in our characters, But in our fonts, that we are displaying. --Ken
