mccThis is a very funny page https://unicode-explorer.com/list/large
SnoopJ@mcc the glyph '﷽' was mentioned in a discussion I saw recently about computing character widths as *rendered* in a terminal, and fundamental futility of this task
ROTOPE~1 ⭐️@rotopenguin @mcc alas, the Unicode Consortium has limited authority over the evolution of human language in general
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin in my opinion, they have much more than they should
@mcc @rotopenguin oh? Anything in particular?
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin Well, for example, if the people of China decide to invent a new hanzi, effectively now they just can't
Or they can, but they have to ask someone for permission. They'd have to do some complex set of steps with a PUA codepoint. Before computer encoding they could just draw it
@mcc @rotopenguin nothing stops them from doing it and not encoding it (e.g. seal forms) but sure the reality is that someone's gonna want to put the thing on the computer at some point, and someone's gonna be in charge of that encoding. Not sure that problem has any solution other than "fuck it all text is purely graphical now"
I'd point to U+32FF SQUARE ERA NAME REIWA as an example of UTC acting in good faith here, but I don't follow along very closely with the massive volume of communication with their colleagues working on standards bodies in China. What I have read makes it seem like a pretty good working relationship
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin my impression is that the unicode body is *very* keen on working with stakeholders, authorities, influential organizations. there are processes for things. if the chinese government wanted to introduce some new hanzi, they would not have difficulty working with the unicode body.
however *people* lack the ability to spontaneously do things under such a system, acting democratically or anarchically. they'd have to work their way up a pyramid
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin and one can imagine this system breaking under some future conditions. the simplification of Chinese under Mao is incredibly political and was heavily resisted by non-mainland Chinese speaking communities, afaik *because* it was associated with Mao. The Unicode body was lucky enough to emerge after the regularization of relations between the west and China. What if a country America hates introduces a new script? What if a *legitimately morally loathsome* government does?
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin There's an unspoken prime directive of Unicode which is "Unicode must not be forked". They will go to any lengths to prevent you *needing* a second standard. That currently leads to a maximalist approach that immunizes them from politics. Is there a future politics which is so rancid that the immunity fails?
@mcc @rotopenguin in your opinion, are there any standards bodies that operate at similar scale but empower individuals better? what does the UTC need to change to make "we accept proposals directly, from anyone" more effective and less "working up a pyramid"?
Edit: to clarify, I'm legitimately interested in your answers to these questions, they are not barbs.
@SnoopJ @rotopenguin I am attempting to raise a conceptual problem with standards bodies as a concept. We have attempted to systemize human thought and in the process we created, without particularly meaning to, restrictions on human thought. I am not at this time requesting changes.
@mcc @rotopenguin oh, okay. That makes sense, a lot of what I'm hearing sounds like fundamental problems with standards existing.
I don't know if there's a better way, but thank you for letting me pick your brain along these axes for a bit