Wowfunhappy wrote:I have long wished that type styles operated similarly to capitalization. Not in terms of data storage under the hood—I'm not suggesting that bold letters should be an entirely different unicode sequence—but in terms of... if caps lock isn't enabled, and I'm not holding down shift, my word processor will never decide to make my text uppercase.
In other words, ⌘B should work like caps lock, except for bold characters instead of uppercase characters. When my bold cursor is enabled, anything I type becomes bold, and vise versa when bold is disabled. My computer should never make the switch for me—it only ever causes problems.
Unicode already has separate versions of the Roman alphabet in cursive and blackletter, as anyone who has spent enough time on Twitter has noticed. I've said before that it's only a matter of time before they decide to add hard-coded bold and italic versions as well. And then all hell will break loose as we scramble to decide whether to hold on to the old conventions or completely rethink the way we treat text formatting. To say nothing of the fact that we still haven't figured out quite what to do with fonts that offer more than two weights.
Jorpho wrote:You'd think the solution would be for Wikipedia to automatically redirect URLs with an open-paren but no close-paren to the equivalent page with the close-paren, because how frequently could article titles with unmatched parentheses possibly occur?
You're talking about the site that still hasn't figured out that people on mobile sometimes send links to people who aren't on mobile and the recipients are usually not fond of looking at a site hard-formatted for tiny screens. Or that people using 12-inch tablets don't need the site to be reformatted for four-inch phones.