Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

[Leonardo Boiko]

Besides, there are already control/formatting characters for such purposes
– several ones, even.  They look like this: <sup>, ^{}, \textsuperscript{},
\*{ \*} …

What's more, these powerful control/formatting characters allow one to
apply not only super/subscript and blackletter, but many more features to
any character as long as the font supports them, including bold, italics,
small-caps, optical size changes and countless others.  I heartily
recommend using these special control/formatting characters, as they can
considerably *enrich *any text.

2016-10-03 14:14 GMT-03:00 Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org>:

> a.lukyanov wrote:
>
> > I think that the right thing to do would be to create several new
> > control/formatting characters, like this:
> >
> > "previous character is superscript"
> > "previous character is subscript"
> > "previous character is small caps (for use in phonetic transcription
> > only)"
> > "previous character is mathematical blackletter"
> > etc
> >
> > Then people will be able to apply this features on any character as
> > long as their font supports it.
>
> I happen to think this would be exactly the wrong thing to do,
> completely contrary to the principles of plain text that Unicode was
> founded upon. But you never know what might gain traction, so stay
> tuned.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20161003/e6c4ac46/attachment.html>