Base character plus tag sequences (from RE: Is the binaryness/textness of a data format a property?)
firstname.lastname@example.org via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Mon Mar 23 17:29:57 CDT 2020
Doug Ewell wrote:
> When 137,468 private-use characters aren't enough?
In my opinion, a base character plus tag sequence has the potential to
be used for many large scale applications for the future.
A base character plus tag sequence encoding has the advantage over a
Private Use Area encoding (except for a prompt experimental use or for
some applications) that the encoding can be unique and thus
interoperability is possible amongst people generally.
QID emoji is just the very start of applications, some not even dreamed
of yet, for which a base character sequence encoding could be used.
Once restrictions of the result of a specific encoding of being only
allowed to be a fixed image are removed, then new information technology
applications will be possible within text streams.
There is the QID Emoji Public Review and issues like this can be
explored there so that they will be before the Unicode Technical
Committee when it assesses the responses to the public review.
In my response of Monday 2 March 2020 I put forward an idea that could
allow the idea of QID emoji to proceed yet without the disadvantages.
No comment after that has been published as of the time of sending this
Whatever your view on whether such ideas should be allowed to flourish
and become mainstream in the future I opine that it would be good for
there to be more responses to the public review so that as wide a range
of views as possible are before the Unicode Technical Committee when it
assesses the responses to the public review, not on just QID emoji as
such but on whether the underlying method of encoding of a base
character and tag character sequence for large sets of items should be
Monday 23 March 2020
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode