Talk:Private Use Areas

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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.

From

• Unicode private use area, so the appearance of the title depends entirely on what font you're using: most Mac users will see an "apple" symbol, while on my home computer, I see it as a "Euro" symbol with an extra bar. Other people have reported seeing such things as a "no such character" box, a question mark, Klingon letters, and even the font maker's copyright statement! --Carnildo 20:24, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Strong Keep. Is there a problem here? I don't understand what Carnildo's concerns are. Redirects are never seen unless: 1. They are linked to in an article, or 2. they are typed into the search box. Since the character cannot be properly seen by inferior computer systems, then we simply won't allow it to be directly linked to in articles, but there is a very good chance that Mac users would enter this character into the search box. I myself once did a search for ⌘ (
    ⌘), the Mac command key symbol, in an effort to learn more about it. Redirects are harmless, and these sorts of redirects are especially harmless. No one but Mac users would ever encounter them, and then only when searching for them with the search feature. (And forgive me, but there is something about this listing that I feel smacks of typical Mac-bashing). Func( t, c ) 03:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Or 3. if Google makes it the title of the article in its search results. It's happened more than once with redirects. --Carnildo 06:27, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: I'm not sure why, but I'm seeing Apple symbol on my Windows 98-based computer. What you see should be largely depends upon which fonts you have installed. Firefox says that it's using Arial for the Unicode and User-defined fonts, which I've fairly recently updated to the fully Unicode-version of Arial, so that's probably where the character is from on my computer. BlankVerse ∅ 14:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete. If this character is in the Unicode private use area, then it has different meanings on different systems, none of which is "correct." So, this redirect would be nonsensical. BTW, characterizing other computers as "inferior" sure does seem hypocritical when you criticize the nomination of smacking of "typical Mac-bashing". Brighterorange 22:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is it supposed to look like? I see a little box. Am I right? Do I win the prize? NatusRoma 04:39, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, if you had followed the redirect, you would have known... — David Remahl 00:55, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete'. Cute idea (I am a Mac user), but nevertheless unusable. Unicode private area. Anythng can go there. ≈ jossi ≈ 04:17, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. If another widespread use of this private use codepoint is discovered, we can make it into a disambig page. This is probably one of the most used private use unicode characters. A redirect is harmless. — David Remahl 00:55, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Perhaps this should redirect to the
    Unicode Private Use Area? ~ Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠
    03:54, 2005 August 5 (UTC)
  • Keep. As we can see, this character already caused a lot of discussion on its own. --Abdull 21:22, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since all instances of this character in the document appear for me (on a Mac) as the Apple logo, it makes sense to me to have rasterized images of each version of the character. Since the character can represent a corporate logo, this raises the question of if a representation of the corresponding Unicode character constitutes fair use. --IntrigueBlue 09:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing the same thing... How would you go about doing this? Paul^C/_T+ 02:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Based on further research, it would appear that the Apple logo was originally included in fonts as a copyright method, because people would not be able to redistribute the font since it contains a trademarked logo. By extension I would assume including depiction of the logo here would not constitute fair use, which kinda throws a spanner in the works. As for the other symbols mentioned, since I can't see them I can't make pictures of them either. Could somebody who can see them do this, and add the pic to the article? --IntrigueBlue 05:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in Windows XP presently and just see ?, in linux I see €. Thryduulf 09:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see little hollow boxes for everything except Wingdings and Webdings, where I see glyphs different from those described... AnonMoos 23:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For me everything is displaying as the insignia of the Klingon Empire. --PiMaster3 ^talk 21:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What OS/browser are you using? Could you upload a high-resolution rasterized/SVG version of the insignia? I've been trying to find a browser that displays that way. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 22:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using Firefox 2.0 on Windows XP. The only font that I think might be causing this would be code2000. --PiMaster3 ^talk 01:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll check that out next time I boot to Windows. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 02:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing it the way IntrigueBlue described it, as all apple logo's. something should be done, but i don't know how. Jordan042 21:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3APsantora 2607:DA80:3:995:C908:70E7:AF64:524A (talk) 07:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, all I see on this page is this glyph: Apple over and over again. It would be great if someone could upload the other glyphs in a similar format and insert them into the article so that others can see the correct image. I'll add the Apple logo where appropriate. Paul^C/_T+ 21:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the discussion above your post. What it boils down to is that the Apple logo was added as a form of copy protection, and the image you linked is listed under fair use. Use in this article would appear not to fall under blanket fair use. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 01:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Still, it would be nice if the other glyphs could be imaged and added to the article..Paul^C/_T+ 09:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find it useless having the same symbol apear exactly the same again & again Tuck99 08:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this article should basically be deleted if it doesn't make sense depending on what computer one is on. Clearly, the windows logo is not an Apple symbol.72.78.57.6 22:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a trademark. You can't extend copyright with a trademark. Fair use still applies. The trademark issue is separate. Pictures of trademarked items are also fine, the key question being if the use of the trademarked image could cause market confusion. That is, could an image of the Apple logo on Wikipedia cause some fool to believe that Wikipedia is an Apple product? Since the law is not based on the theoretical maximum fool, the answer is no. Usage here is fine, no problem. Replacing the Wikipedia puzzle-globe logo with an Apple logo would of course be another matter entirely. 24.110.145.106 (talk) 06:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wingdings and Webdings are symbol fonts that are not mapped to Unicode system, so there is nothing at the codepoint. You can check it out with BabelMap for example. --Octra Bond (talk) 10:00, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See this discussion: when parsing text (eg. XML) is interesting to reduce complexity replacing tokens or tags by 1-character token, so, generates a simple text with usual characters and non-ambiguous tokens-as-characters. This simple string can be parser by usual regular-expressions instead complex

Summarizing: the "other use" is "as reliable Unicode 1-character-token in parsing context".

Example: XML representation of multilingual text as

  <section class="main"><p>Hello, any character as 𩸽.</p><p>Bye!</p></section>

Now, we can reduce tagged representation to "text and token" representation, remembering the sequence of tags (eg. in an array). Let's see replacing XML-tags by "_T1_", "_T2_", etc. tokens, the text will be
_T1__T2_Hello, any character as 𩸽._T3__T4_Bye!_T5__T6
... But to process the tokenized text by a regular expression the less complex is to reduce tokens to 1-character... To avoid conflict with "real text" exoctic characters (like "𩸽"), we adopt PUA as the best choice, that never conflics.

Supposing the adoption of PUA codes 61528 (decimal) and 61527, that are the UTF-8 characters "" and "". Now we can represent the XML text with the tokenized text and arrays (suppose JSON representation), and process its content by a simple regular expression.

{
  "content":"Hello, any character as 𩸽.Bye!",
  "open_tags":["section","p","p"],
  "attributes":[{"class":"main"},null,null],
  "close_tags":["p","p","section"],
}

Krauss (talk) 20:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect U+f8ff. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 􍁷. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 􏰉. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

As of Unicode 1.0.1, in the now-antiquated system of dividing the Basic Multilingual Plane into "zones", U+D800..U+DFFF were part of the O-zone, not the R-zone (which included the private use range U+E000..U+F8FF): [1]. This was prior to U+D800..U+DFFF becoming the surrogate S-zone. So U+D800..U+DFFF seems to have been reserved space, not private use space. --HarJIT (talk) 19:51, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I see where the confusion may have arisen, since the Unicode 1.0.0 PUA ended later, at U+FDFF (but also started later, at U+E800): [2] --HarJIT (talk) 19:53, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]