5 ms·
I recently had similar thoughts on Unicode: http://replicated.cc/concepts/unicode http://replicated.cc/concepts/unicode Most of its complexity comes from its le
by gritzko 7y ago
I recently had similar thoughts on Unicode: http://replicated.cc/concepts/unicode http://replicated.cc/concepts/unicode
Most of its complexity comes from its least-useful features.
We must find some way to rollback that spiralling complexity.
Or maybe, like in the old days, burn it all and start anew?
- dvfjsdhgfv 7y agoIt's because its creators were well aware of the shortcomings of the previous half-solutions and wanted to future-proof the standard.
- hathawsh 7y agoI can't help but wonder how they concluded that they should add arbitrary emojis to Unicode. Are emojis the future of language?
- gnulinux 7y agoIf not text, what even emojis are? How is a smiley face any different than "!" or "?" it carries a meaning in the text itself. As a programmer, I want my user to type text including emojis so I can store it as string, not a messy mix of string and images.
- Jasper_ 7y agoKeep in mind that the 16-bit limitation relied on the Han unification, an incredibly controversial project where related languages from three Asian cultures all got butchered in the process. It was culturally insensitive and limited the range of Unicode, and is a major reason Unicode is actually rare in these locales: China still majorly uses GB, and Japan Shift-JIS, and Taiwan Big5. The experience was one of the big reasons Unicode 2.0 raised the limit, as they never wanted to go through that process again.
- zozbot234 7y ago16-bit is also a non-starter if you want to include historical or rare CJK characters, historical/ancient scripts, symbol sets, etc. So a 32-bit encoding does make a lot of sense.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y agoI don't know that I've ever heard a good reason why we need to have historical/ancient scripts, symbol sets, etc. in something like Unicode.
- Tomte 7y agoScholarly publications on the web.
- gritzko 7y agoThe only extinct language used in scholarly publication is Latin, AFAIK.
- SahAssar 7y agoAh, so nobody is doing any research on older non-european cultures then? No archeological or linguistic or other kinds of research? Nothing on african, asian, american cultures?
- gritzko 7y agoI mean, a corpus of researchers writing articles in an extinct language, reading them like that, googling in the language? Vatican is the only example I can think of.
- Tomte 7y agoNo. They are writing about those languages and need to cite the original. Show phrases in that language and then comment on them in English.
- zzo38computer 7y agoI think it is just mistaken in general to use one character set for all purposes. If you try that (as is the case with Unicode), it results usable for most purposes but equally bad for all of them, rather than good.