> Yes. Unicode should not be about semantic meaning, it should be about the visual. Like text in a book.
replyDo you think 1, l and I should be encoded as the same character, or does this logic only extend to characters pesky foreigners use.
They are visually distinct to the reader.
replyUnicode is about semantics not appearance. If you don't need semantics then use something different.
reply> Unicode is about semantics not appearance.
replyAnd that's where it went off the rails into lala land. 'a' can have all kinds of distinct meanings. How are you going to make that work? It's hopeless.
>Yup. Consider a printed book. How can you tell if a letter is a Greek letter or a Latin letter?
replyI can absolutely tell Cyrillic k from the lating к and latin u from the Cyrillic и.
>should not be about semantic meaning,
It's always better to be able to preserve more information in a text and not less.
> I can absolutely tell Cyrillic k from the lating к and latin u from the Cyrillic и.
replyThey look visually distinct to me. I don't get your point.
> It's always better to be able to preserve more information in a text and not less.
Text should not lose information by printing it and then OCR'ing it.