[sw-l] challenge for programmers - SSS-ID mapping onto Unicode

Stuart Thiessen sw at PASSITONSERVICES.ORG
Thu Jun 23 15:29:47 UTC 2005

You may be right that we only have 1024 assigned at the moment.  But
that is where we need to do the necessary research to develop a more
complete proposal to the Unicode Consortium along with the necessary
details about how SW works and fonts and rendering issues, etc.  So
that they know how many code points we need and so that software
companies can apply the rendering rules that are necessary. What we
knew then when Valerie began the process, and what we know now is
different.  So we just need to do our homework and we can submit a
better proposal and get the space that we need. After all, Chinese has
a very large section in Unicode, so there is no reason why we can't
have a large section ourselves considering the fact that all of our
symbols can be used by any sign language.

I have also posed some questions to others who are involved with
Unicode and they tell me that sorting in Unicode is not necessarily
dependent on the numerical position in Unicode. Apparently, it is
possible to specify custom sort orders so that new symbols can be
"inserted" into the sort order appropriately even if they are not in
the right numerical sequence in Unicode. This stands to reason because
many of the European languages all use the Extended Latin characters
which are not in sequential order with the unaccented Latin characters.
  Yet, software sorts them appropriately per language. So, that may not
be a concern.



On Jun 23, 2005, at 12:56, Steve Slevinski wrote:

> Tomas Klapka wrote:
>> Is 16 bits the maximum given to IMWA? I think the Unicode has the
>> mechanism to
>> encode more bits.
> Hi Tomas,
> Currently, only 1024 characters have been assigned to SignWriting.
> The 16 bit number is from my investigation of Unicode and a short
> article I wrote Sept 2, 2004 called "The IMWA's place in Unicode." I
> wrote the article on the Oculog.net forum that I later dropped.  I
> have resurected the forum and it is back online if you want to take a
> look.
> http://signpuddle.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=24
> FYI,
> -Steve

More information about the Sw-l mailing list