[OT] Bytext (was Re: Encoding ConScripts)

Mark E. Shoulson mark at kli.org
Wed Oct 13 20:44:17 CDT 2021

On 10/13/21 21:11, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> On 2021-10-13 11:37 AM, William_J_G Overington via Unicode wrote:
>> Whether the Unicode Technical Committee does actually change the 
>> rules for some specific particular circumstances is for the future, ...
Perhaps.  But at some point the conversation of "this is out of scope." 
"can you make it in scope?" "no."  "how about now?" starts to wear thin.
> Bytext! Anyone dissatisfied with Unicode principles and stability 
> would be free to join the Bytext community and advance suggestions 
> there, except the community appears to have disappeared.  But it might 
> be possible to find original documents in Wayback archives. Then 
> Bytext could be revived and reanimated.  "Phoenix Bytext"? "Bytext 
> 2.0"?  The point being that whoever revives Bytext (or builds 
> something new from scratch) would be in charge of establishing policy, 
> which might open the door to all kinds of personal and idiosyncratic 
> glyphs.
> My prediction is that such an effort would flop, other predictions may 
> vary.
> Meanwhile, Unicode still has the PUA with all of its charm, allure, 
> and mystique.

I've been wondering what the need is to tilt at windmills.  There *are* 
all kinds of ways to make your ConScript/emoji used.  There is the PUA, 
people use graphics "stickers", there is rich text, there are alternate 
encodings... if you won't make the effort to make things available to 
even see if there is interest out there apart from you, if you won't 
form a community asking for this, why should Unicode?


More information about the Unicode mailing list