From: Christopher Fynn (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Jan 04 2009 - 00:12:13 CST
> If if extensive use of a PUA character set is grounds for encoding
> then the question is how to decide when PUA usage is sufficient
> for encoding.
Indeed. There is at least one *national* Standard, GB/T20524-2006
("Tibetan Coded Character Set Extension A") which uses the PUA
[F300-F8FF]. Part B of this standard uses F0000-F16FF.
These national standards are essentially extensive sets of precomposed
Tibetan ligatures previously rejected by UTC and WG2 for encoding that
China then decided to encode in the PUA.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 04 2009 - 00:14:34 CST