From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jan 14 2004 - 16:08:27 EST
On 14/01/2004 13:01, Han-Yi Shaw wrote:
>I'm glad some folks are reading me correctly. :-) After all, without
>being Unicode-throughout, I don't see how it'd be possible to support
>the 303 surrogates in the JIS X0213 standard like we do in Office 2004.
>By "Unicode-throughout", we mean that MacOffice 2004 supports Unicode-
>input, storage, and rendering. In the past (e.g., MacOffice X), our
>apps only accepted characters in older encoding schemes, which then get
>converted to their equivalent 16-bit form (in Unicode encoding) for
>storage, after which are once again "downgraded" to MacRoman or
>MacJapanese before sending them to QuickDraw routines for rendering.
>In MacOffice 2004, this convoluted conversion process has been
So, let me just check. In this case, and given suitable fonts, Mac Word
2004 should be able to render correctly text in any language using
precomposed Latin, Greek and Cyrillic scripts, indeed all LTR scripts
with no composition or complex shaping?
If you can confirm this, I will withdraw my negative comments with
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 14 2004 - 16:51:57 EST