From: Michael Everson <everson_at_evertype.com> > On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:51, Shriramana Sharma wrote: > >> On 08/19/2011 08:11 PM, vanisaac_at_boil.afraid.org wrote: >>> why there weren't private use Variation Selectors. >> >> Because you are already free to use PUA codepoints as VSs? > > Because the existing VSs are sufficient? > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Quote from 16.4: Standardized variation sequences are defined in the file StandardizedVariants.txt in the Unicode Character Database. Ideographic variation sequences are defined by the registration process defined in Unicode Technical Standard #37, “Unicode Ideographic Variation Database,” and are listed in the Ideographic Variation Database. Only those two types of variation sequences are sanctioned for use by conformant implementations. In all other cases, use of a variation selector character does not change the visual appearance of the preceding base character from what it would have had in the absence of the variation selector. This seems to not allow for private compact use of Variation Selectors. Am I missing something here? -Van
