What's the process for proposing a symbol in the Unicode table?

[Peter Constable]

> in practice an end user is likely to want to introduce the krul character from a font. So encoding the krul character in regular Unicode would be helpful to end users and in my opinion being helpful to end users and consumers is what is important in encoding decisions.

By this line of reasoning, every icon in any symbol font, such as Font Awesome<https://fontawesome.com/icons> would be a candidate for encoding. UTC has already explicitly decided against that argument for encoding. Moreover, the successful, widespread use of fonts like Font Awesome clearly demonstrates that encoding in Unicode is not necessary for users to easily use graphic symbols in content.

The Unicode Standard encodes characters, where “character” is understood to mean an element of textual content and the encoding is intended for purposes of text processing. Not every graphic element qualifies for encoding simply because it can be presented using a font and placed in a text frame of a DTP application.

Cf. https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode15.0.0/ch01.pdf



Peter

From: Unicode <unicode-bounces at corp.unicode.org> On Behalf Of William_J_G Overington via Unicode
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 5:54 AM
To: unicode at corp.unicode.org
Subject: Re: What's the process for proposing a symbol in the Unicode table?


I wonder if the encoding rules are no longer fit for purpose.



The encoding process should be to be helpful to consumers, not to lead to an agreement to restrict progress.



I get the impression - and if I have got it wrong please correct me - that if one were using the krul character in a desktop publishing program that the likely scenario is that there is a large rectangular text frame filling most of the page and containing text in the Dutch language, in, say, 14 point, and there is in the right margin, near the lower edge of the page, a small rectangular text frame into which the krul character is inserted, quite possibly at a larger size than the other text, at, say, 36 point or 48 point.



Thus the krul character is not within a line of running text involving other characters as well as itself.



I say that the fact that the krul character is not within a line of running text involving other characters as well as itself should not go against the encoding of the krul character as a regular Unicode character.



This is because, in practice an end user is likely to want to introduce the krul character from a font. So encoding the krul character in regular Unicode would be helpful to end users and in my opinion being helpful to end users and consumers is what is important in encoding decisions.



William Overington



Monday 19 February 2024




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20240222/9050ff9e/attachment-0001.htm>