Re: Not snazzy (was: New Unicode Savvy Logo)

From: Theodore H. Smith (
Date: Thu May 29 2003 - 08:50:45 EDT

  • Next message: John Cowan: "Re: IPA Null Consonant"

    > Compliant is a problem term, as compliance is a problem concept. I
    > believe
    > we discussed, some months ago, the problem of claiming compliance for
    > systems or applications, since very little (any?) software implements
    > everything in Unicode or implements everything equally well. What
    > would it
    > mean to say that a website is 'Unicode compliant'? Is there any point
    > in
    > proclaiming a website 'Unicode compliant' if the visitor is using a
    > browser
    > that is *not* Unicode compliant insofar as being able to correctly
    > display
    > that site?

    It is compliant in terms of using a correct and standardised way to
    provide Unicode. So compliant does apply to ANY valid UTF8 :o)

    Compliant should mean to the user, that it doesn't break any Unicode
    rules. Valid UTF8 doesn't break any rules, so it is compliant.

    "Compliant" is pretty perfect for what you mean, I'd think. Also, you
    can apply this term to software, but in a different sense.

         Theodore H. Smith - Macintosh Consultant / Contractor.
         My website: <>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 29 2003 - 09:34:42 EDT