On 08/14/2002 04:17:29 AM "James Kass" wrote:
>Can't apps needing internal processing code points which
>are only going to be deleted before export simply use the PUA?
NO! E.g. if your word processor used E000 to indicate an anchor point for
a table, and I use E000 for capital U-bar, what's going to happen when I
import my data into your app?
Basically, you can think of the FDD0..FDEF columns as
programmer/control-PUA -- safely segregated from the user/content-PUA (aka
"the PUA").
>No application should delete anything without first asking the user's
>permission.
>
>Imagine spending considerable time and effort getting a text to
>look just as desired only to have some application arbitrarily decide
>to delete half of it without your permission or knowledge.
But no app should depend upon non-character codepoints being safely
transmitted in order to maintain a certain look -- the Standard tells them
plainly this is bad. And if they're not being transmitted, well, any
well-written app isn't going to delete code values that it has inserted
for it's own internal purposes until it knows that it's done with them.
The discussion of deletion has been in the context of app A leaking its
junk, and app B receiving that junk and deciding what to do with it. In
that case, deletion is quite reasonable.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Aug 16 2002 - 02:42:13 EDT