2673Re: Multibyte bugs
- Apr 11, 2010
On 11/04/10 16:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> It's weird that digraphs are defined for an area that doesn't have
> characters assigned to it. I wonder what happened here. Perhaps this
> changed at some point in time? If we know the reason we may want to
> drop all the dibgraphs for 0xexxx.
My guess is that when that RFC was drafted in 1992, some of the charsets
they wanted to list used a few characters which, at that time, weren't
clearly assigned to one Unicode codepoint, and that the RFC authors
arbitrarily (and maybe temporarily) placed these characters in a
"private use area", which is the only place where "characters not yet
assigned a Unicode codepoint" may go. This is only a guess, however. I'm
not sure how many people are reading this (extremely low-volume) ML, but
maybe someone knows the history of those mnemonics from RFC 1345 better
than you and I do? If someone with that knowledge is reading this,
please speak up.
IMHO it makes no sense to have digraphs in Vim for "private use"
characters. I propose to drop any of them that cannot be usefully
reassigned to some "official" Unicode codepoint elsewhere. E000 to E028
means forty-one codepoints, it ought not to be a big problem.
LAUNCELOT: At last! A call! A cry of distress ...
(he draws his sword, and turns to CONCORDE)
Concorde! Brave, Concorde ... you shall not have died in vain!
CONCORDE: I'm not quite dead, sir ...
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY)
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>