Ed,
I think you might emphasize more carefully that Unicode conformance and
degrees of support for particular scripts are independent questions. There
are non-Unicode systems that support for example Arabic, and
Unicode-conformant systems that do not "support" Arabic (other than
conveying it intact). Obviously Unicode conformance and script support are
important questions about any system, but script support is not addressed by
the Unicode conformance chapter because there is no necessary technical
implication between them.
In particular, Unicode conformance is well-defined, whereas support even for
any particular script such as Arabic is not. Script "support" includes a
graded range of features as per your list, many of which will be supplied
modularly as optional add-ons, and many of which will be keyed to language
or locale (e.g. spelling/grammar checkers, message resources, keyboard
layouts) rather than script. Hence precisely your conclusion that
"developing some checklist to define what features ... are implemented in a
particular product that claims Unicode 3.0 conformance is a non-trivial
exercise".
Joe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT