On Tuesday, May 25, 2004 5:23 AM, Michael Everson wrote: > >At what point is it more practical to say 'use a graphic'? > > When they are just pictures of things. Not when they are coherent > sets of things with structure, used by people for well over a century > to typeset information about an important and widespread realm of > human activity.
Couldn't the same be said of dance notation (labanotation, Benesh, etc.), which is explicitly out of scope for Unicode? It seems to me that you are proposing to encode another graphology. The dominoes, chess pieces, and playing cards of your proposal are not alphabetic, ideographic, or symbolic; they are not linguistic. They are pictorial. Ted Ted Hopp, Ph.D. ZigZag, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-301-990-7453 newSLATE is your personal learning workspace ...on the web at http://www.newSLATE.com/
