Surrogate support was not turned on by default in Win2000 because the
Windows team was waiting for the standard to be finalized. It was also added
late, so to reduce the potential impact they had it off - a safe bet since
the standard was still 1+ years from completion.
Chris
Sent with office10 2125
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl W. Brown [mailto:cbrown@xnetinc.com]
Sent: October 3, 2000 7:44 AM
To: Unicode List
Subject: RE: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
Michka,
I would expect surrogate support in SQL Server 2000. Windows 2000 has
surrogate support however, it is turned off by default. I don't know why.
It is also supported by True Type so that once they get the assignments you
can install new fonts and enable surrogate support.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael (michka) Kaplan [mailto:michka@trigeminal.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 2:06 PM
To: Carl W. Brown; Unicode List
Subject: Re: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
I agree 100%, and I could make the same argument for surrogate support in
SQL Server 2000 (i.e. there are no characters, so support is not relevant at
ship time) but since I cannot ever state with certanty what the next version
of products (i.e. Whistler or Yukon) will support, I do not want to fall in
the trap of making excuses now which would not be true next time.
The general rule that "support" is a difficult attribute to capture and my
example about the Unicode Bidi algorithm is hardly contrived, since many
products are technically non-compliant, but in ways that I tend to agree
with the differences and not with the algorithm.
michka
a new book on internationalization in VB at
http://www.i18nWithVB.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl W. Brown" <cbrown@xnetinc.com>
To: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
> Michka,
>
> I would not expect Windows 2000 to support Unicode 3.0 especially since
the
> final build of W2K was sent manufacturing in November of 1999 too late for
> Unicode 3.0. Even if it had come out earlier in 1999 it would have been
> difficult to implement late in the development cycle unless the changes
were
> minor.
>
> Carl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael (michka) Kaplan [mailto:michka@trigeminal.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 10:15 AM
> To: Unicode List
> Subject: Re: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
>
>
> Windows NT's latest version, Windows 2000, does not support Unicode 3.0.
> There are many scripts for which no keyboards exist, and which do not even
> have fonts or shaping rules for rendering.
>
> When it comes out is a generic question, so I will give you a generic
> answer: when they get the work done! :-) I do not know of a central place
> that lists who supports what version of Unicode is kept, and it might be a
> pretty monstrous thing to keep track of since it is a "per product" thing.
>
> Plus, there are other details: if Mozilla or IE chooses not to support a
> specific tenet of the Unicode Bidi algorithm, does that mean it is not
> compliant? If an OS has no keyboard or fonts for Ethiopic languages, does
> that mean it is not? And if a word processor does not support shaping
rules
> for the Tibetan script or Sinhala, is it not?
>
> michka
>
> a new book on internationalization in VB at
> http://www.i18nWithVB.com/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Elaine Keown" <keown@altavista.com>
> To: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 9:57 AM
> Subject: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
>
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm writing to inquire about the "lag time" between when Unicode 3.0 hit
> the street and when implementations in Windows NT, software tools, fonts,
> etc. came out? Does stuff usually come out within 3 months, 6 months, ?
> >
> > Is there a central URL that keeps track of implementations, so you can
> call it up and find out what OS, tool, etc has already implemented 3.0,
3.2?
> >
> > Also, if I just can't wait for Unicode 4.0, are there suggestions for
how
> to put the characters I'm waiting for into some block? I would like to
> start programming soon with text markup symbols that I hope will be
formally
> available in 4.0 or maybe 3.2, whatever. I may need them for a thesis
> project, for a text-processing algorithm.............. Is there a
procedure
> to do this?
> >
> > Thanks, Elaine
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> >
> > Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now!
> > http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:14 EDT