From: "Rick McGowan" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > There are other characters too in the Tamil alphabet that cannot
> > be represented.
> These are probably ligatures; the basic alphabet is certainly represented.
Have you read the block introduction on Tamil in Unicode 3.0?
There is one thing missing in the Unicode Standard, and it can be found in
#5 on ligatures (unchanged from Unicode 2.0). The behavior described there
is only one of *two* desired possibilities. I have a client who is currently
forced to use two different fonts (Latha and the font from Monotype) in
order to get the behavior they want... the ability to sometimes create the
ligatures they want, sometimes not.
But in general, I agree with you that people who usually dismiss Unicode as
not being able to render all characters are missing out of the characters
available via ligatures.
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:13 EDT