From: Peter Jacobi (peter_jacobi@gmx.net)
Date: Sun Dec 07 2003 - 07:25:50 EST
Dear Doug, All,
> BTW, your "Unicode test page" is marked:
> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
> content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
This is of course redundant as this is the HTTP default.
The heading 'Unicode' means the logical content, not the
encoding. The Tamil content is given as hex NCRs.
> while your TSCII test page is marked "x-user-defined".
As the legacy Tamil charsets are not IANA registered, Tamil
users typically have a TSCII font set up for the display
of "x-user-defined"pages.
> I'm not sure
> what either of those declarations accomplishes.
Hope, I could clarify this.
> [..] Display engines
> need to do a better job of applying style to individual reordrant
> glyphs, that's all.
I fully agree with this, Do you know any display engine which is capable
of this?
>
> > It's hard to promote Unicode, when things that have worked in the
> > past, stop working.
>
> This is alarmist and unnecessary.
This is born out of sheer frustration. I was arguing for weeks on some
mailing
lists, that programmatic conversion to Unicode is easy and no features are
lost.
Now a very simple point I forgot to think about hit me.
Regards,
Peter Jacobi
-- +++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++ Neu: Preissenkung für MMS und FreeMMS! http://www.gmx.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 07 2003 - 08:20:49 EST