Re: Unicode is universal, so how come that universality doesn’t apply to digits?

[Ken Whistler]

On 12/21/2020 5:00 PM, Zach Lym via Unicode wrote:
>> The fact that the UTR is a PDF document doesn't seem pertinent.
> PDFs do not rank well on Google, you can't deeply link to specific
> sections,

Actually, you can, if you set them up correctly:

https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode13.0.0/ch22.pdf#G12146

That links right to Table 22-3, Script-Specific Decimal Digits on p. 
829, in Section 22.3 of the latest version of the core specification.

>   and they are generally a PITA to work with.
Well, your mileage may vary. HTML has its own PITA aspects.
>    The Unicode
> standard publishes PDFs*not*  because it is a good idea, but because
> it's inconvenient to change a 30-year-old publishing workflow.

20, not 30, actually. Prior to Unicode 3.0, the Unicode Standard was 
done with a different family of editorial tooling. But yeah, it is 
inconvenient to change, especially since the document is riddled with 
hand-tweaked figures and hacked up fonts. And it's a thousand pages 
long, and it has internal indexing and the sections, figures, and tables 
are all cross-referenced in the document. And oh, did I mention? It's a 
thousand pages long.

Various folks have wanted to reformat it to something more web-friendly 
and searchable over the years, but they have tended to discover other 
things that they needed to do when faced with the actual amount of work 
involved. ;-)

--Ken

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20201221/c4d6e3dd/attachment.htm>