> > So Unicode is not supported in a real time environment ?
> I did it several years ago. It is much easier when you accept that most
> of the complexity in Unicode is there for good technical reasons and to
> work with it rather than twist it to fit old ASCII programming practices.
Again, the problem we were discussing concerns using a Unicode-compliant
script ("dialog automation", not writing system) engine against an existing
host or device. Of course we can design new protocols, but we can't force
existing hosts or devices to use them. It's not a question of old
programming practices; the question is how or whether we can use modern
techniques on one machine to communicate (or, more precisely, automate
interactions) with other machines that we can't change.
But by this point we're going around in circles; I can't imagine what else
can be said on this topic, other than exchange of practical experience in
implementation of telecommunications applications in which Unicode is
involved at one end but not the other, or at both ends.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT