A last missing link for interoperable representation

David Starner via Unicode unicode at unicode.org
Tue Jan 15 01:07:25 CST 2019

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:58 PM Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode
<unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> *If* the VS is ignored by searches, as apparently it should be and some
> have reported that it is, then VS-type solutions would NOT be a problem
> when it comes to searches

Who is using VS-type solutions? I could not enter except for manually
using some sort of \u notations. Languages that need special input
support can easily adapt to unusual rules, but English Unicode is
weirdly hard to enter, because the QWERTY keyboard is ubiquitous and
standard. Smart quotes, non-HYPHEN-MINUS hyphens and dashes, and
accents generally need memorizing of obscure entry methods or resort
to a character list. Without great support from vendors, a new Unicode
italic system only going to be used by the same people who currently
use mathematical italics.

> (and don't go whining about legacy software.
> If Unicode had to be backward-compatible with everything we wouldn't
> have gone beyond ASCII).

Then where's this plain text that absolutely needs italics? Those
legacy software systems are the place where unadorned plain text still
lives. Anything on the Web is inherently dealing with rich text.

Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.

More information about the Unicode mailing list