RE: Version(s) of Unicode supported by various versions of Microsoft Windows

From: Jony Rosenne (rosennej@qsm.co.il)
Date: Fri Mar 05 2004 - 14:21:54 EST

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Version(s) of Unicode supported by various versions of Microsoft Windows"

    I believe the question could be asked with respect to particular languages.

    For an example of Hebrew, see the unofficial English translation of SI 4281
    (1998) , Information Technology: Implementation of Hebrew in the Hypertext
    Markup Language (HTML), http://www.qsm.co.il/Hebrew/si4281e.htm#render

    We tried to specify the minimal requirements for HTML compliance for the
    Hebrew language.

    Jony

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org
    > [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Kenneth Whistler
    > Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 8:12 PM
    > To: petercon@microsoft.com
    > Cc: unicode@unicode.org
    > Subject: RE: Version(s) of Unicode supported by various
    > versions of Microsoft Windows
    >
    >
    > Peter said:
    >
    > > People *really shouldn't* ask "Does product X support
    > Unicode version
    > > N?" They should be asking questions like "Can product X correctly
    > > perform function Y on such-and-such characters added in Unicode
    > > version N?"
    >
    > And he's absolutely right.
    >
    > However, it is also clear that for the next decade at least
    > people will continue to ask the wrong questions about
    > products with regard to Unicode support, and we will continue
    > to have to find ways to meaningfully field thos questions.
    >
    > It isn't really their fault. Outside the character mavens and
    > the I18N engineers actually working on the implementations
    > nobody can really be expected to understand the intricacies
    > of the standard's development or the complications of rolling
    > out various kinds of support for various groups of characters
    > through API's and functional modules of complex, distributed systems.
    >
    > All they know is that Unicode 4.0 has been published, that
    > "supporting Unicode" is a good thing, and that product X is
    > reputed (or claims) to support Unicode 2.0 --- or whatever.
    >
    > If nothing else, we have to find ways to answer the
    > unanswerable questions for government agencies, because they
    > will find ways to require support for Unicode Version N.N in
    > procurement processes, just like they find ways to require
    > support for GB 18030, for example.
    >
    > --Ken
    >
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 05 2004 - 14:54:22 EST