and some legacy computing symbols.
<http://blog.unicode.org/>
Legacy to me means all these symbols were 7-bit ASCII.
So now we have multiple encodings for '<' and '>' plus a
whole host of others already represented in ASCII ?
That is crazy, it is bad enough there are multiple symbols for
single-dashes and quotes.
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:35:29 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote:
That is crazy, it is bad enough there are multiple symbols for
single-dashes and quotes.
Which ones do you think are not distinctly different?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Which ones do you think are not distinctly different?
See:
https://jkorpela.fi/dashes.html
To me there is no need for multiple '-' characters.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
and some legacy computing symbols.
I wonder what this means. Legacy to me means all these symbols
were 7-bit ASCII. So now we have multiple encodings for '<'
and '>' plus a whole host of others already represented in
ASCII ?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
and some legacy computing symbols.
I wonder what this means. Legacy to me means all these symbols
were 7-bit ASCII. So now we have multiple encodings for '<'
and '>' plus a whole host of others already represented in
ASCII ?
That is crazy, it is bad enough there are multiple symbols
for single-dashes and quotes.
<snip>
<http://blog.unicode.org/>
The £ is obviously essential.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 388 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 05:20:36 |
Calls: | 8,220 |
Calls today: | 18 |
Files: | 13,122 |
Messages: | 5,872,259 |
Posted today: | 1 |