From: African Oracle (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue May 04 2004 - 15:37:11 CDT
"The existing composites were included only out of necessity so that new
Unicode implementations could interoperate with existing implementations
using legacy industry-standard encodings." - Peter Constable
Are we saying we have exhausted such necessity?
And what are these legacy-standard encodings?
"No new composite values will be added". - Peter Constable
The above sounds dictatorial in nature.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Constable" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 10:27 PM
Subject: RE: Just if and where is the then?
> > If a can have U+0061 and have a composite that is U+00e2...U+...
> > If e can have U+0065 and have a composite that is U+00ea...U+...
> > Then why is e with accented grave or acute and dot below cannot be
> > a single unicode value instead of the combinational values 1EB9 0301
> > etc....
> > Since UNICODE is gradually becoming a defacto, I still think it will
> not be
> > a bad idea to have such composite values.
> The existing composites were included only out of necessity so that new
> Unicode implementations could interoperate with existing implementations
> using legacy industry-standard encodings. Apart from the backward
> compatibility issue, these composites go against Unicode's design
> principles and are not needed.
> No new composite values will be added.
> Peter Constable
> Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
> Microsoft Windows Division
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT