As I understand it, there is no requirement to render the whole repertoire,
and if the rendering Hebrew and Arabic is not supported there is no
requirement to handle bidi.
I this correct?
At 06:59 27/09/99 -0700, Hart, Edwin F. wrote:
>Jonathan Rosenne raises one of the problems with the description of Unicode
>2.0 conformance. The chapter describes what is required for a product to
>*fully* support Unicode 2.0. However, I believe that it is safe to say that
>most products implement only subsets of the Unicode 2.1 repertoire and
>functionality (e.g., bidi algorithm). Thus, 2 products may claim to support
>Unicode 2.0 or 2.1 but each may implement different subsets and neither may
>provide the support that the user expected.
>However, developing some checklist to define what features of Unicode 3.0
>are implemented in a particular product that claims Unicode 3.0 conformance
>is a non-trivial exercise.
>Edwin F. Hart
>The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
>11100 Johns Hopkins Road
>Laurel, MD 20723-6099
>+1-443-778-6926 (Baltimore area)
>+1-240-228-6926 (Washington, DC area)
> -----Original Message-----
>From: Jonathan Rosenne [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Mon, September 27, 1999 05:41
>To: Unicode List
>Cc: Unicode List
>Subject: Re: Products supporting Unicode
>Since many products support Unicode but do not support bidi, I suggest it
>would be useful if for those who do it would be indicated.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT