Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Kent Karlsson kent.karlsson14 at
Thu Apr 6 11:24:48 CDT 2017

Den 2017-04-06 03:08, skrev "Michael Everson" <everson at>:

> On 6 Apr 2017, at 02:05, Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at> wrote:
>>> Do generic font makers intend to support both graphic terminal emulation and
>>> chess?
>> I don't know. But it should not be impossible to do so.
> And you think the proposal as it does leads to that?

Yes. One in one single font (according to your current proposal), one can
only have EITHER terminal emulator version, OR chess border version. Not
both. Using variant selectors for the chess border variants allow for both
glyph variants. Maybe it does not make much difference in a proportional
font. But for a "mono-width" font the terminal emulator versions for these
border characters would be "narrow", but the chess border versions should
be "fullwidh"/"square" (compare CJK in terminals; double the width of, e.g.,
Latin characters).

>>> Should chess font makers be burdened with graphic terminal emulation glyphs
>>> they know nothing about?
>> If it is really a chess font, they can just use the glyphs for the chess
>> variety also as the "plain" (terminal emulator variety), and it would not
>> matter (as long as no-one insist on using it for terminal emulation).
> Ha, so you¹re saying it¹s mostly for things like Everson Mono that it mattersŠ
> ;-)

Yes (but there are other fonts than Everson Mono that are suitable for
terminal emulators...).

There are still people who read (plain text) emails in terminal emulators
(or other email clients that cannot handle font switching inside an email,
and may have selected a "terminal emulator" font for viewing emails). Though
"mono-width", the chess board glyphs should be "fullwidth"...

/Kent K

>> All that is needed for that is a manoeuvre to copy a few glyphs within the
>> font (when creating the font). I guess that is not very hardŠ
> It is not.
> Michael Everson

More information about the Unicode mailing list