Talk:Symbols for Legacy Computing

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing systems Low‑importance

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Characters in table don't display

Since Wikipedia doesn't include this version of Unicode, and the table is filled with ▯, is it worthwhile to have an article on the subject? If it is, would it be good to have a picture of the characters for this page, Template:Unicode chart Symbols for Legacy Computing, and Box-drawing character? TuskDeer (talk) 02:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia does "include" this version of unicode, the problem lies in the lack of widespread use of fonts that include these characters, at the top of my head two fonts that include it are BabelStone Shapes(https://www.babelstone.co.uk/Fonts/Shapes.html) and Unscii(http://pelulamu.net/unscii/), an unless there is a an acceptable way for wikipedia to embed said fonts on the templates(alongside a warning that many computers do not poses a font that shows these characters and a link to where they can download the fonts that do support it if they plan on using the characters) i think that images showing what the characters should look like would be the best approach, maybe the pictures could be taken from the finalized proposal to the unicode consortium? StarButterflyIsCute (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a problem for all characters when they are newly-added to Unicode, and it can take 10+ years before some characters gain widespread fort support, so there is no easy solution. People often try to get the template chart to display correctly by hard-coding particular fonts that work for them in the CSS, but I do not think that this is a good idea. The actual template chart showing the Unicode characters should not be replaced by images as users may want to copy the Unicode characters even if they do not display correctly on the page. We provide a link to the "Official Unicode Consortium code chart" prominently at the top of the chart, so I do not think it is really necessary to add a chart showing images to the Wikipedia page as well as the current chart. BabelStone (talk) 12:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The note on the page that says "You may need rendering support to display the uncommon Unicode characters in this table correctly." is not helpful. It leads to a page that discusses other natural languages in great depth, but says nothing that helps solve the practical problem of displaying the Symbols for Legacy Computing in the table. I have not found any resources that do. Simply listing the name of any font that does support the characters would be more helpful, IMHO. 88.97.62.77 (talk) 10:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Table does not line up with image, some characters missing

Here is a screenshot of the table, with the font Pragmata Pro. (Wikipedia didn't let me embed). Unfortunately I don't know the markup language used to generate it well enough to fix it, but hopefully someone else is able. As stated in the other section, this is most likely used for people who want to copy the symbols (that's what I was doing), who likely are unable to see said symbols. Currently, this page may mislead people depending on which symbols they select. --KKITAANIK (talk) 07:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: After further investigation it seems the font is at fault, in that it is displaying the wrong symbols for the given code. Manually inputting the code and converting it to a Unicode glyph yields the same discrepancies. I attempted this with another font which supports this code block, BableStone Shapes, and it does seem to be accurate. --KKITAANIK (talk) 08:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]