From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Tue Nov 18 2003 - 15:53:26 EST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]
On Behalf
> Of jameskass@att.net
> Any application which bans or prevents the interchange or storage
> of PUA code points should be considered non conformant.
I agree entirely with your ultimate intent, but I must say you are
wrong.
It is perfectly acceptable for a conformant application to use every
single PUA codepoint for its own internal purposes, and to reject
incoming PUA codepoints or display them with some default "not
supported" glyph. A conformant application can even display every
character except (say) U+26A0 as a default "not supported" glyph and
still be called conformant. The kinds of things a conformant app cannot
do is to take in (say) U+0047 "G" and display it as "F" or pass it on as
U+0042 "B" while claiming it is not transforming that text.
Of course, such apps are not the kind of thing most of us find useful.
And it would certainly be A Good Thing if applications did not hinder
(or even took steps to facilitate) the use of PUA characters according
to semantics defined by a given user.
Peter
Peter Constable
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
Microsoft Windows Division
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 18 2003 - 16:41:56 EST