[rfc-i] Bug in RFC Search page...
Martin J. Dürst
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Sun Oct 1 18:35:15 PDT 2017
On 2017/09/27 07:32, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
> Emoji are astral codepoints, aren't they? 🤞🏻
Many of them indeed are, but not all of them
> Given how browsers are quite inconsistent in the characer sets they load,
> it would be nice to have explicit indication of the character sets required
> to render a document.
> If you mean font support (I'm not going to trip myself up over the
> difference between character sets and encodings and all that, but I'm
> pretty sure 'Unicode' has you covered for characters/codepoints) that's a
> mostly-solved problem in the modern web, with webfonts and the like.
Webfonts is one thing. The other is that even if we move beyond ASCII,
we are still very conservative. The chance that an RFC soon will use
some of the characters accepted in some recent version of Unicode is
quite low (unless somebody wants to make a point, in which case the RFC
editor will probably stop them). And for the characters from older
Unicode versions, the OS and/or the browser has the necessary fonts
available, unless somebody is using a hopelessly outdated OS/browser
(which would be a bad idea anyway).
More information about the rfc-interest