Re: Tech: Unicode (was...)

En réponse à Philippe Caquant :


>Thanks for information. I begin to see the whole thing
>a little clearer by now. I hope that in a near future
>all fonts provided on computers will be full-Unicode,
They already are. Unicode only states which number is associated with which 
character. It doesn't say that the fonts must contain all the characters. 
Anyway, fonts with all characters would be to big to be practical.

>so there wouldn't be any problems left (but I'm still
>expecting the keyboard to change automatically
>according to the alphabet used, which would be quite
>possible if, instead of being mechanical, it were
>conceived as a tactile screen. Oh no ! I told this
>great idea on the Web, and hence lost all the
>royalties I could have got if I had patented it).
My experience with tactile screens says it's a bad idea. Moreover, most 
people never can get used to a single key mapping. And you expect them to 
learn more of them?

> >
> > Yeah, but chances are you won't be changing ranges
> > that often in a document.
>
>Except in case you're interested in linguistics...
Linguists are always specialised. You can't be a linguist in everything, 
just like you can't be an engineer in everything. There's a limit to what 
the human mind can learn in a lifetime. In other words, a linguist 
specialised in Asian languages won't need to have access to Sequoia's 
syllabics, while a linguist specialised in Semitic studies won't probably 
need to use Japanese kanji (and if they actually do, it will be so rare it 
won't be a problem if they have to switch to another font for a minute). 
Moreoever, nobody can read all scripts available in the world. What's the 
point of having a document containing texts in Chinese, Sumerian, Georgian, 
Old Maya and Russian all in their original script, if you can't read them? 
Practically, what you're asking for is nonsense.


>Yes, but I meant that it's more difficult to maintain
>a dozen fonts at the same level than just a single
>one.
When will you understand that there is *no* reason why you should maintain 
all the fonts at the same level? (especially since most of them won't ever 
be upgraded by their creators) Unicode is completely compatible with its 
former versions of itself since 1996! There are just no Unicode fonts 
available out there that are older than that!

Christophe Grandsire.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

You need a straight mind to invent a twisted conlang.