Re: SSP default ignorable characters, was: Variation selectors and vowel marks

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 02:54:17 EDT

  • Next message: Antoine Leca: "Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?"

    Kenneth Whistler <kenw at sybase dot com> wrote:

    >> But this is a dead letter as we have seen because there is no way
    >> that users can make private agreements with major systems software
    >> providers.
    > Correct. But I think you may have overblown expectations about
    > what one should be able to do with PUA code points and what
    > major systems software providers should be able or be required
    > to support for them.

    In theory, I would think one should be able to do whatever the heck one
    wants with PUA code points, so long as it involves "characters" in the
    Unicode sense of the term, used in some way for representing text.

    What major software providers can be expected to support is another
    matter entirely. Very little commercial software supports most of the
    Unicode character properties at all, other than relatively basic
    concepts like uppercase and lowercase. Show me a general-purpose,
    commercial software product that understands numeric properties and
    interprets them, or groups characters together that have the same
    General Category, or uses canonical combining classes flexibly to
    perform normalization. If there are any, there aren't many, and if we
    can't get that kind of support for assigned characters, it's not likely
    we'll see it for the PUA.

    -Doug Ewell
     Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 27 2004 - 03:43:23 EDT