I'm just speaking about the many yearly inventions of sinograms for personal/proper names, not about the ues of traditional characters for normal language.
People just start by assembling components with common rules. Then they enhance the produced character just like we personalize signatures. But for me, all these look like personal signatures and are not neede for formal encoding and even these persons will accept alternate presentations if it's just to cite them (and would not like much that you imitate their personal signature by standardizing it in a worldwide standard: I think many of these encodings have severe privacy issues, possibly as well copyright issues !). 2018-03-07 22:35 GMT+01:00 Ken Whistler <kenwhist...@att.net>: > > > On 3/7/2018 1:12 PM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: > >> Shouldn't we create a variant of IDS, using combining joiners between Han >> base glyphs (then possibly augmented by variant selectors if there are >> significant differences on the simplification of rendered strokes for each >> component) ? What is really limiting us to do that ? >> >> > Ummm.... ambiguity, lack of precision, complexity of model, pushback by > stakeholders, likely failure of uptake by most implementers, duplication of > representation, ... > > Do you think combining models of Han weren't already thought of years ago? > They predated the original encoding of unified CJK in Unicode in 1992. They > weren't viable then, and they aren't viable now, either, after 26 years of > Unicode implementation of unified CJK as atomic ideographs. > > --Ken > >