Re: Languages supported by UTF8 and UTF16

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Sat Sep 10 2005 - 11:15:56 CDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Old Norse orthography"

    Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:

    > Support of a language/script only with PUA means that this language/
    > script is NOT supported by Unicode itself, but only by the authors of
    > the private agreement. Unicode provides no facility for those
    > languages/script other than just allowing them to be embedded in
    > documents containing other supported languages/scripts.
    > So, Klingon, Tengwar or Ewellic are (still) NOT supported by Unicode
    > or one of its UTFs because they these scripts currently have no
    > standard codepoint assignment.

    I don't really want to fight to the death over this. Most people,
    including me and obviously Philippe, would interpret the statement that
    a given script is "supported by Unicode" to mean that its characters are
    officially and publicly encoded. However, there is *arguably* a
    secondary definition that because Unicode includes a Private Use Area,
    it implicitly "supports" the private encoding of any script that fits
    within the PUA. This is not true of most other character encodings.

    Doug Ewell
    Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 10 2005 - 11:18:09 CDT