New CJK characters

[john_h_jenkins]

As I understand it, the encoded repertoire for Sutton SignWriting is inadequate for actual display of text because Unicode doesn’t provide a mechanism for the two-dimensional layout SignWriting uses (TUS p. 831). In this, it’s like music and mathematics. 

> On Nov 3, 2021, at 5:22 PM, abrahamgross--- via Unicode <unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:
> 
> Sutton Signwriting is completely compositional, and yet it was encoded despite all the downfalls 
> 
> 2021/11/03 午後6:19:32 john_h_jenkins via Unicode <unicode at corp.unicode.org>:
> 
> 
> This is actually touched on in TUS (§ 18.2) and the FAQ (Why doesn't the Unicode Standard adopt a compositional model for encoding Han ideographs? Wouldn't that save a large number of code points?). Outside of the momentum issue mentioned, compositional methods don’t work because of “spelling” ambiguity and failure to address issues such as collation, text-to-speech, searching, semantic analysis—basically, everything you want to use text for *other* than rendering. Even in rendering, you aren’t covering the region-specific shapes, at least not with IDS. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20211104/c6d74f2b/attachment.htm>