> Is there anybody who reads this who actually implements Unicode support in
> real life operating systems?
I just received the letter from Christopher John Fynn [firstname.lastname@example.org]
who pointed me to "UniScribe API in Win 2K".
Guess what? The assumption of this API is that the run of Unicode characters
is enough to determine if the script is "complex". This means again that the
assumption of the author is that *no information except the unicode
characters themself* is needed to properly render even *complex scripts*.
In my opinion, if Cyrillic needs to be "complex script" is more than
questionable, since by their definition:
A complex script has at least one of the following attributes:
Allows bidirectional rendering.
Has contextual shaping.
Has combining characters.
Has specialized word-breaking and justification rules.
Filters out illegal character combinations.
Compared to all this, Cyrillic is as simple script as Latin is.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT