undefined | Better HN

0 pointsweinzierl7mo ago0 comments

"Unicode still does lots of work on language support."

Yes, and that's a good thing.

"The notion that emoji support impedes that is simply not true."

If it does not, why are there so many unresolved issues and shortcomings lingering around for years.

It's not that the issues around Han Unification will go away by ignoring them. There are related issues in western languages, like the umlaut/trema distinction. Pushing these topics, which are core to Unicode's original mission, into OpenType is not a solution.

Why do we continue adding pictures of random every day objects, like disco balls, when not even characters common in ordinary books can be represented?

Don't you think reallocating resources from emoji work to more serious issues would make sense?

0 comments

arp2427mo ago

These are not "unresolved issues"; these are opinionated views. That's okay, but please, don't fool yourself in to thinking this is somehow objective fact because it's just not. Encoding all human scripts in one encoding was always going to involve some choices, and no matter which choices would have been made some people were going to disagree with it.

I have no idea which "characters common in ordinary books" are missing; the explicit goal of Unicode is to encode exactly that sort of thing.

weinzierlOP7mo ago

Unicode's original mission was to encode all characters needed for written communication in the world.

Han Unification fails this mission and that is not a matter of opinion.

"I have no idea which "characters common in ordinary books" are missing; the explicit goal of Unicode is to encode exactly that sort of thing."

«Günther a souligné l’ambigüité de son discours.»

there is an umlaut and a dieresis.

They are different characters with different function. In traditional book printing they used to look differently and quality fonts do still have both. Unfortunately Unicode does not encode both of them.

arp2427mo ago

To claim that these letters "cannot be represented" is just outright bizarre. You literally you did so yourself. Expecting Unicode to contain a codepoint for every single rendering variation is not realistic and the line must be drawn somewhere, with other rendering information provided in another way (e.g. lang=de, font-style, whatnot).

You can disagree how Unicode does this (or how other encodings do it, for that matter) but this is just an utterly disingenuous thing to say. I no longer believe you are engaging in good faith. You have either not understood Unicode or you're intentionally misrepresenting it. Good bye.

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsweinzierl7mo ago0 comments

"Unicode still does lots of work on language support."

Yes, and that's a good thing.

"The notion that emoji support impedes that is simply not true."

If it does not, why are there so many unresolved issues and shortcomings lingering around for years.

Why do we continue adding pictures of random every day objects, like disco balls, when not even characters common in ordinary books can be represented?

Don't you think reallocating resources from emoji work to more serious issues would make sense?

0 comments

arp2427mo ago

I have no idea which "characters common in ordinary books" are missing; the explicit goal of Unicode is to encode exactly that sort of thing.

weinzierlOP7mo ago

Unicode's original mission was to encode all characters needed for written communication in the world.

Han Unification fails this mission and that is not a matter of opinion.

"I have no idea which "characters common in ordinary books" are missing; the explicit goal of Unicode is to encode exactly that sort of thing."

«Günther a souligné l’ambigüité de son discours.»

there is an umlaut and a dieresis.

arp2427mo ago

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse