Aargh

[venta]

OK, so html isn't usually the first area of legislation you consider when you take over the world, but:

When I am dictator, every character set will have exactly one encoding. Forget your latin1, latin2, latin3. There will be latin, and you will like it.

Furthermore, each encoding will have exactly one name. Anyone who calls an encoding by a non-standard name will be sneered at, and will not be pandered to by the poor sods who have to put encoding support into browsers.

Not that I'm bitter today, you understand :)

Comments

[wimble.livejournal.com]

No idea: I'm not actually dealing with the Unicode support. Ill have a poke around, but your mention of codepage bothers me: we need this to be able to use this on web pages, rather than DOS (or derivative) base applications, which is what code page implies to me.

[neilh.livejournal.com]

Ah, OK, privately defined characters aren't the
answer then. Short of sending out a whole bunch
of .gifs I can't think of a sensible one...
doubtless there is an answer though.

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

doubtless there is an answer though.

Unicode 4.0?

There isn't really much excuse for characters essential to the OED not being included. Perhaps OUP should be making a formal approach to the Unicode consortium.

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

we need this to be able to use this on web pages

Although even if the required characters were in Unicode, you'd still have the problem that they wouldn't be in the average font...