On Thursday 31 May 2012, Doug Ewell <[email protected]> wrote: > William_J_G Overington <wjgo underscore 10009 at btinternet dot com> wrote:
> > Further to that point of order, is there any rule that absolutely prevents > > the deprecated status of a character or collection of characters being > > removed? > UTC has not ever shown the slightest inclination to do so, if that answers > your question. Thank you for replying. What I was wondering about was whether if someone proposes U+E0002 for encoding for a future new technology, whether the fact that tags are currently deprecated would automatically stop that proposal being accepted for encoding because of perhaps some guarantee in the rules never to reverse deprecation or something like that. > > I feel that by hybridizing the suggestions of Doug and Philippe that an > > elegant solution using tags and an advanced format font could be designed. Thinking about this after posting and thinking of the vast coding space that could be opened up for flag encoding by just adding U+E0002 into regular Unicode, I began to think of the possibility of proposing the addition of U+E0007 so as to open up another encoding space where each item in that encoding space could be displayed either as a sequence of tag glyphs using an ordinary font, or displayed as one glyph by using glyph substitution technology with an advanced format font or displayed localized using a database technology with the item in that encoding space used as a key to the database. I was thinking that the above would involve visible glyphs for the tag characters. I was thinking of the possibilities, then I noticed something. In a later post Philippe Verdy wrote as follows. > .... (or in Place 14, but that plane is not intended for visible symbols). Ah! There is a font that has visible glyphs for the tag characters, together with a visible glyph for a Private Use Area tag-style character at U+FFFF2 available as a free download from the following forum post. http://forum.high-logic.com/viewtopic.php?p=10587#p10587 William Overington 1 June 2012
