http://www.acronymfinder.com/Information-Technology/PUA.html
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > "PUA"? > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: APL Under-bar Characters > From: "Erkki I Kolehmainen" <[email protected]> > Date: Aug 18, 2015 6:55 AM > To: "'Marcel Schneider'" <[email protected]>,"'Unicode Mailing List'" > <[email protected]> > CC: [email protected] > > Mr. Schneider > > > > Free Software Movement or not makes no difference. Furthermore, please > consult the membership roster of Unicode before making statements on what > Unicode is a consortium of. > > > > You also state: > > If underbar letters are for the sole use of GNU APL, their implementation and > font support will be catered for by this organization, and it would be enough > to discourage their use outside of APL to meet the security issues. > > If composed letters are not acceptable for whatever and how > non-understandable reason, there is a perfect solution: PUA. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Erkki I. Kolehmainen > > Tilkankatu 12 A 3, 00300 Helsinki, Finland > > Mob: +358400825943, Tel: +358943682643, Fax: +35813318116 > > > > Lähettäjä: Unicode [mailto:[email protected]] Puolesta Marcel > Schneider > Lähetetty: 18. elokuuta 2015 10:32 > Vastaanottaja: Unicode Mailing List > Kopio: [email protected] > Aihe: Re: APL Under-bar Characters > > > > On 18 Aug 2015 at 06:56, David Starner < ><mailto:[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> There are many languages, particularly Native American languages, given >> written form in the typewriter era that use letters with under-bar as part >> of their alphabet. And the underbar is no different from the cedilla, the >> acute and grave accents, the umlaut or many other modifiers used to make new >> characters in languages across the globe. There are single code-point >> versions of characters like ä, but that's historical coincidence, and they >> are equivalent to the two code-point versions. Arguing atomicity is missing >> the point; A̲ is as atomic as Ä in Unicode's eyes. > > IMHO the problem was aroused from GNU APL being implementing Unicode but > still hesitating (and seemingly even about to abandon). I just pick one > e-mail out of the archives (following Alex Weiner's invitation) > <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-apl/2015-08/msg00047.html> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-apl/2015-08/msg00047.html > and have no time to browse them all but as I must implement APL on the > keyboard along with universal Latin, I'm interested in decrypting how GNU APL > view characters. IMO the way Unicode worked out to feasibly encode all > characters on the world, with decomposition sequences and taking over > precomposed characters only for backward compatibility's sake, opposes to GNU > APL sticking with the inherited model. This antagonism may be exacerbated by > GNU being a part of the Free Software Movement, as opposed to the business > model of the companies Unicode is a consortium of. This may partly explain > the tone of one part of this thread (except for my own comment). > > So it could really be a good idea to make GNU APL at ease with Unicode. If > underbar letters are for the sole use of GNU APL, their implementation and > font support will be catered for by this organization, and it would be enough > to discourage their use outside of APL to meet the security issues. > However, Ken Whistler explained clearly > [http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2015-m08/0122.html] that today, > APL would take advantage from updating towards the up-to-date character > model. To facilitate this by making it plausible, I suggest to consider that > free software and proprietary software, rather than antagonistic, should be > considered as complementary. > > I hope this (as are other people's contributions on this thread) to be a > constructive view helping to clear the differends, given that particular > requests cannot be dealt with entirely as long as the underlying philosophy > isn't satisfactorily taken into account. > > Marcel > > >
