Re: [tlug] Re: Unicode

[Stephen Lee <sl@example.com>]

Charles Muller <acmuller@example.com> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, it is because the grievances are largely based on
> misunderstandings of what Unicode is supposed to do.

I think that is reasonable because it appears that the Unicode consortium
has made some conpromises that muddles the original claims. 

e.g. if (1) Unicode codes only characters and cares nothing about glyphs,
and (2) characters are language-neutral and thus can be unified, then
the language codes are unneccessary (the only use I can see for them is
for glyph rendering).

e.g. Code points for vertical punctuation marks are allocated --
although those are supposed to have the exact same meaning as the
horizonal ones.  (the only difference is in rendering which again
supposedly is not a Unicode issue.)

A lot of these can be addressed by reasons practical, and these arguably
makes Unicode a more user-friendly coding, not vice versa.

Stephen