RE: Definitions

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Tue Nov 18 2003 - 15:53:26 EST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Definitions"

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: []
    On Behalf
    > Of

    > Any application which bans or prevents the interchange or storage
    > of PUA code points should be considered non conformant.

    I agree entirely with your ultimate intent, but I must say you are

    It is perfectly acceptable for a conformant application to use every
    single PUA codepoint for its own internal purposes, and to reject
    incoming PUA codepoints or display them with some default "not
    supported" glyph. A conformant application can even display every
    character except (say) U+26A0 as a default "not supported" glyph and
    still be called conformant. The kinds of things a conformant app cannot
    do is to take in (say) U+0047 "G" and display it as "F" or pass it on as
    U+0042 "B" while claiming it is not transforming that text.

    Of course, such apps are not the kind of thing most of us find useful.
    And it would certainly be A Good Thing if applications did not hinder
    (or even took steps to facilitate) the use of PUA characters according
    to semantics defined by a given user.

    Peter Constable
    Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
    Microsoft Windows Division

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 18 2003 - 16:41:56 EST