Re: Bug in TR 19, and fancy HTML in TR's

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Sat Jul 08 2000 - 13:36:15 EDT

Michael \(michka\) Kaplan <> wrote:

>> Can the authors (or reformatters) of Unicode Technical Reports please
>> keep the use of "fancy" HTML and Javascript in TR's to a minimum?
>> Tables and simple stylesheets ought to be sufficient. This is not an
>> elaborate sales or marketing presentation, after all -- it's a
>> TECHNICAL REPORT. Please don't tell me to update or change my browser
>> to get the "full experience" of the TR. I should be able to print the
>> thing on dead trees and get all the information that way if I choose.
> Well, some people might actually prefer you upgrade your browser to
> something that supports Unicode a bit more effectively, at the very
> least. :-)
> NN 4.0x has tons of problems with bidi and other complex scripts, with
> Asian characters, and more. Its not entirely unreasonable for the
> online resources of the Unicode Consortium to make use of technologies
> that support Unicode and not be obliged to test everything on older
> browsers that do not. I think its likely that they did not even know
> that such an issue would exist, since they have upgraded to browsers
> and technologies that support the very standard they are writing for.

This has nothing to do with bidi, Asian characters, or any other aspect
of Unicode support. I know that some of the TR's, such as TR 21, "Case
Mapping," include UTF-8 characters and these generally do not print
correctly using older browsers. I know about this problem and deal
(reluctantly) with it. This is not about any Unicode-related problem,
but about advanced HTML. TR 19 is tagged as UTF-8, but contains only
one UTF-8 character (U+00A9 COPYRIGHT SIGN), and this is clearly not
where my problem lies.

I understand the need and desirability to use Unicode features in a
Unicode technical report, I just don't see the major advantage of
embedding Javascript in one.

I wonder if Erik or some other Netscape person can examine the TR and
figure out what NN 4.06 doesn't like about it.

> As a side note, I do not test code on my Osborne 1 or my Epson PX-8,
> either. :-)

Nor I on my Timex Sinclair 2000 or Atari 130XE. But I hardly think of
Windows 95 and NN 4.06 as being quite as ancient as that.

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:05 EDT