public at khwilliamson.com
Tue Jun 7 21:39:07 CDT 2016
On 06/07/2016 06:25 PM, Marcel Schneider wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 14:52:36 -0600, Karl Williamson wrote:
>> On 06/07/2016 02:48 PM, Karl Williamson wrote:
>>> I heard that someone was considering adopting ZWJ. They seemed to think
>>> that non-printables are not adoptable. But I was unable to find a clear
>>> list of criteria. The page that allows one to adopt said that it wasn't
>>> available, but that page really doesn't make it clear how one can test
>>> for this without actually doing the adoption. (Since it doesn't
>>> actually ask for your credit card number on the initial page, one can
>>> back out before the final commitment, but that's not a very friendly
>> After I wrote that, I found this that I previously overlooked
>> "You can’t sponsor candidate characters (those not yet released in a
>> version of Unicode, such as the Emoji Candidates), nor certain
>> characters such as invisible ones."
>> But why this rule. Why should someone be forbidden to adopt ZWJ?
> Likewise I seriously considered adopting NNBSP, that is very important
> as a layout control, e.g. in the fr-FR locale, and is almost always stable
> in the applications, as opposed to NBSP. Indeed neither do I see any
> reason not to be able to adopt these characters, the less as there *is*
> a visible representation, displaying their abbreviation in a box.
> However I was aware from the beginning that my desire was unconventional.
> At least it isnʼt the kind of ideal gift for your niece as referred to on
Actually, someone suggested to me, only partially tongue-in-cheek that
Unicode pitch to Sesame Street
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Street) that they adopt some
letters, as the show often (used to anyway) say that this episode is
brought to you by the letters Q and x (different letters sponsored
different episodes). Or maybe the pitch could be to the uncles and
aunts, "Now you can be like Sesame Street, and sponsor a letter."
More information about the Unicode