On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Jukka K. Korpela <[email protected]> wrote: > Applications that operate on plain text and use one fixed but configurable > font are a much better example. If you need to use, say, a currency symbol > that has not yet been added to Unicode but can be included in the font, then > a Private Use codepoint is the only good way
Or record the character using some form of escape. I'm not thinking of many applications that operate on plain text that aren't processed before display to an end user, and there's a reason why currency is recorded by 3 ASCII characters. > In HTML, on the other hand, you can instead use images, and CSS lets you > scale the images to the font size if desired And that's problematic, for the exact same reasons using images of text is always problematic. It can't be copy and then searched for or pasted, and you practically have to write it in ASCII or PUA and transliterate it into references to images. PUA is never necessary if you have your own application, as you can transfer data in whatever format with your own application. It's most useful with standard formats, like HTML and email, where the PUA lets someone use letters or scripts almost like they were encoded. -- Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero. _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
