Template talk:Chset-legend

Clarification
I would like to ask for some clarification to the designers of this template, before I keep on using it. I’ve seen that several editors use it differently. Here is my proposal:
 * 1) The color listed in “Alphabetic” has not been used for any alphabetic character. It has not been used for alphabetic characters with accent neither for alphabetic characters in other scripts (Greek, Cyrillic, etc.). Shouldn’t it be changed to “Basic Latin Alphabet characters”, instead?
 * 2) The entry “Numeric digit” does not clearly state what it stands for. It does not state if it is only for the basic full form of the digits 0 to 9 or if it applies to variations also, like superscript and subscript digits. It does not state if it is only for Latin scripts digits or if it is for other scripts digits. In the TIS 620 article, the Thai digits have the same color as the Latin digits. But in the ISCII article, all characters have the same color! Also it is not clear if this color should be applied only to digits or to any numerical character (fractions, characters from other scripts which represent numbers and not digits, etc.).
 * 3) “Graphic character” should be changed to “Other graphic characters” or something like “Pictorial character”. In computer terminology, a “graphic character” is any character that is rendered by a shape instead of executing a command, i.e., “graphic character” is the opposite of “control character”.
 * 4) The expression “International” was a poor choice and might be seen as an anglocentric point of view. To my understanding, “international” means “anything that belongs to more than one country”. If so, any letter from the basic Latin alphabet is “international” since they are used in more than one language. An example of a “national” character could be the Icelandic letter “Þ, þ” since they are used presently (as far as I know) in only one language: Icelandic… The usage of this color has been applied to any “letter” that doesn’t “look English”: Latin letters with accents, letters from other scripts, phonemic graphemes that aren’t letters but rather syllables (ex.: Katakana), etc. Perhaps, a more neutral designation would be “Letters beyond the basic Latin alphabet”, clearly stating that “letter” means any phonemic grapheme, no matter if it belongs to an alphabetic, alphasyllabary or syllabary writing system.
 * 5) The entry “Extended punctuation” looks rather a “fit all bucket” since it has been used for anything that doesn’t fit in the aforementioned entries. Currency symbols are not punctuation. Mathematical symbols are not punctuation. Unit symbols are not punctuation. Special case letters are not punctuation. And I could go on and on. Splitting this entry in several others could be cumbersome (we would run out of colors…), perhaps, a more consensual name would be “Other typographical characters”.

Code Page Guy (talk) 16:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)