Jump to content

Talk:Mapping of Unicode characters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Indexheavy (talk | contribs) at 02:56, 30 April 2007 (On the charge of editorializing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I added the summary/categorized table of the UCS as I said I would on the UCS dicsussion page. I think if anyone feels the table should be narrowed, the decimal start and end could be omitted without much loss of readability. As I said in edit summariesa and over at the UCS discussion page, I'd like to also add links from within the table to sections of the mapping of unicode characters article and other articles too. I think each of the broad categories (lettered A through N) should be discussed in this article. Then links from each script-block could go to the article on the script or to an ariticle on the script in unicode/ucs.

So I plan to add the folowing sections to this article:

  • Scripts (Modern and Anicent)
  • Phonetics
  • Unified Diacritics
  • Unified Punctuation
  • Symbols
  • Numerals
  • Musical Notation
  • CJK and Unihan
  • Compatbillity characters (legacy and others) and normalization
  • Control characters, format characters and variation selectors
  • Surrogates
  • Private Use Code Points

Anyone else is welcomed to jump in on these tasks. --Indexheavy 01:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the charge of editorializing

I can understand how you might read it that way in isolation. I'm not trying to editorialize so much as help make the distinction between semantic characters and glyphs clearer. Many people cite it as a mantra, but don't necessarily understand it (now I'm editorializing). The point that this section (and what I plan to add to the linked main article) is to show that UCS lists the characters according to their glyph names. Meanwhile Unicode adds alias names that try to get a t the phoneme semantics. Right now its a hybird that helps serve as an excellent example of this distinction so often cited (numerals too, though less so). I hope that makes it clearer what I'm trying to do there. In the past many of these articles have simply been long lists of Unicode characters (at one point there was a single article deovted to every character). I didn't find that very encylopedic. I think here at wikipedia we serve readers better by expositing and providing examples and fleshing out these categories and expositing on some of the idiosynncratic characters (like the phoneme characters). --Indexheavy 02:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, perhaps I'm not understanding correctly what you thought was editorializing. Please respond here to clarify. Indexheavy 02:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]