Tag characters and in-line graphics (from Tag characters)
"Martin J. Dürst"
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Tue Jun 2 20:22:52 CDT 2015
On 2015/05/29 11:37, John wrote:
> If I had a large document that reused a particular character thousands of times,
Then it would be either a very boring document (containing almost only
that same character) or it would be a very large document.
> would this HTML markup require embedding that character thousands of times, or could I define the character once at the beginning of the sequence, and then refer back to it in a space efficient way?
If you want space efficiency, the best thing to do is to use generic
compression. Many generic compression methods are available, many of
them are widely supported, and all of them will be dealing with your
case in a very efficient way.
> Given that its been agreed that private use ranges are a good thing,
That's not agreed upon. I'd say that the general agreement is that the
private ranges are of limited usefulness for some very limited use cases
(such as designing encodings for new scripts).
> and given that we can agree that exchanging data is a good thing,
Yes, but there are many other ways to do that besides Unicode. And for
many purposes, these other ways are better suited.
> maybe something should bring those two things together. Just a thought.
Just a 'non sequitur'.
More information about the Unicode