Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

[Michael Everson]

On 4 Apr 2017, at 00:59, Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> No, he wants two characters WHITE CHESS KNIGHT and WHITE CHESS KNIGHT ON DARK BACKGROUND, and a variation selector, say VS2, that when applied to them yields a glyph that works with block elements.
> 
> It might be simpler if WHITE CHESS KNIGHT ON DARK BACKGROUND was defined as a character that worked with block elements. 

I can’t fathom how you would configure a font to do whatever it is you think you’re describing here. I don’t follow it. “worked with which block elements, to do what?

If it’s draw a box around the board, I already said, the answer is to change the graphics terminal block elements because in a chess-font environment their positional function is used, not their graphics terminal glyph. 

>> Then you’re still stuck for a solution for non-em-square characters for inline text. 
> 
> No, WHITE CHESS KNIGHT should continue to fulfil that role.  My only worry is that one might need a variation selector, say VS1, to force the choice of a suitable glyph.

I don’t get what you’re on about. I’ve already solved this problem, and whatever it is you’re describing sure doesn’t sound intuitive. 

I’ve shown my implementations which do what I need them to do. I don’t know if you can do the same, but go ahead and make your font to prove it, and write it up clearly in a counter-proposal if you think it’s the right way to . 

Michael Everson