🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug21.054826.4016@adobe.com> delahunt@adobe.com (Jim DeLaHunt) writes:
>Well, we weren't talking about this kind of document portability before.
>Unicode only pretends to provide portability of *plain text* across 
>platforms.  Think of it as having the advantages and limitations of plain
>ASCII text.  Formatting and ligature substitution systems like Line Layout
>Manager are (as far as I understand) platform-specific, but can support
>multiple encoding schemes. The PostScript language can describe formatted
>documents in *final form* across platforms.

Well, perhaps the intent of Unicode is only to encode plain text, but if
you look through some of the glyphs it does encode, I would argue they
are there for typographical "richness". For example, look at range
U+2100 -> U+214F. These are "letterlike" symbols including some black
letter characters and some script characters. Or look at U+2150 -> U+218F.
These are additional number forms including roman numerals. Then we have
U+2460 -> U+24FF which are the enclosed alphanumerics. And of course in
range U+2700 -> U+27BF we have all of ITC's Zapf Dingbats.


-- 
Michael Wang
mmwang@adobe.com