William_J_G Overington <wjgo underscore 10009 at btinternet dot com> wrote:
> 5. Are the proposed characters in current use by the user community? > No > ---- > This appears to be a major change in encoding policy. > This, in my opinion, is a welcome, progressive change in policy that > allows new characters for use in a pure electronic technology to be > added into regular Unicode without a requirement to first establish > widespread use by using an encoding within a Unicode Private Use Area. It is exactly the change I was worried about, the precedent I was afraid would be set. > I feel that it is now therefore possible to seek encoding of symbols, > perhaps in abstract emoji format and semi-abstract emoji format, so as > to implement a system for communication through the language barrier > by whole localizable sentences, with that system designed by > interested people without the need to produce any legacy data that is > encoded using an encoding within a Unicode Private Use Area. Sadly, I can no longer state with any confidence that such a proposal is out of scope for Unicode, as I tried to do for a decade or more. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
