Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?
kenwhistler at att.net
Thu Oct 6 11:27:13 CDT 2016
On 10/6/2016 9:04 AM, Oren Watson wrote:
> If this is a real need, why not petition more software to allow the
> use of the U+8C partial line up and U+8B partial line down characters
> for the this purpose?
Because U+008C and U+008B are relics from the days when control codes
were used in terminal control protocols and to drive print trains in
devices like this:
Their functions have been completely overtaken by markup conventions
such as <sub>...</sub> and <sup>...</sup>, which *are* widely supported
already, even in most email clients, ri^ght out of the b_ox .
And I suspect that Yucca's statement "so it would usually be best to
give up the superscripting idea here" is intended to mean give up on
asking for a separately encoded superscript character for each Latin
letter, including accented ones (or applying accents to separately
encoded superscript letters). Because, after all, this stuff already
just works: «3^ème » (and not «3ᵉ̀ᵐᵉ», by the way!).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode