PETSCII mapping?

[Elias Mårtenson]

On 6 April 2017 at 11:32, Rebecca Bettencourt <beckiergb at gmail.com> wrote:

We do have to provide Unicode with fonts, I believe. We can use an existing
> C64 font, such as Pet Me. Or, we can create a new font with vectorized
> versions of the characters.
>

Are there any existing C64 fonts with vectorised glyphs?


>  Then there is the issue of what to do with the text colour and style
> selectors. PETSCII has characters that indicate a colour change as well as
> reverse video. At least the reverse video one is important, as it's being
> used to construct new characters. For example, PETSCII only has a single
> character "half block" (top part filled). The way you represent a half
> block with the bottom part filled is to use the reverse video together with
> the former.
>
>>
>> It would probably make more sense to represent the reversed symbols as
>> separate code points?
>>
>
> I would actually leave the color-change and reverse-video characters to a
> higher-level protocol.
>

For colour change, I definitely agree. The reverse video case is a bit
different since the resulting characters are very much separate symbols by
themselves.

I think I need to take a closer look at existing C64 textual content to see
how it was actually being used in real life. I do recall that reverse video
was heavily used in file names, so there is definitely an argument for
introducing “COMBINING PETSCII REVERSE VIDEO”. It would be unfortunate if
higher-level markup is required to accurately represent the name of a file
stored on a C64 floppy disc.

Regards,
Elias
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20170406/b2323488/attachment.html>