Re: Questions on ZWNBS

From: Chris Jacobs (chris.jacobs@freeler.nl)
Date: Sat Aug 02 2003 - 15:47:19 EDT

  • Next message: souravm: "Does Unicode 3.1 take care of all characters of 'Hongkong Supplimentary Character Set - 2001' (HKSCS-2001) ?"

    [ cc Theodore Smith ]

    So I had it wrong, it _is_ deprecated.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Jim Allan" <jallan@smrtytrek.com>
    To: <unicode@unicode.org>; <otaylor@redhat.com>
    Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 8:38 PM
    Subject: Re: Questions on ZWNBS

    > Theodor H. Smith posted:
    >
    > > I'm thinking that 0xFEFF shouldn't be in a UTF16BE string, except at
    > > the start right?
    > >
    > > For other kinds of UTF, I'm not sure if it is allowed or not. I know it
    > > is allowed in UTF16LE, although discouraged.
    > >
    > > Instead of "can't use ZWNBS", I think that char is discouraged. Where
    > > is the rule that discourages it?
    >
    > See http://anubis.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/n2235.htm for the proposal
    > to replace the ZWNBS use of U+FEFF with a new character U+2060 WORD
    JOINER.
    >
    > See http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/UFE70.pdf for current definition
    > of U+FEFF stating:
    >
    > • use as an indication of non-breaking is deprecated; see 2060  instead.
    >
    > See http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2000.pdf for the definition of
    > U+2060 WORD JOINER which states:
    >
    > • a zero width non-breaking space (only)
    > • intended for disambiguation of functions for byte order mark
    > → FEFF zero width no-break space
    >
    > U+20620 WORD JOINER should be used instead of U+FEFF if one's font and
    > application supports it.
    >
    > Jim Allan
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Aug 02 2003 - 16:24:49 EDT