From: Christopher Fynn (chris.fynn@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Jan 11 2009 - 03:31:56 CST
On 11/01/2009, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> BTW This is not hypothetical, there are already cell phones available in
>> Tibet which use a pre-composed Tibetan character set:
>> <http://www.actapress.com/PaperInfo.aspx?PaperID=30325>.
> And all of those pre-composed elements can be represented using existing
> Unicode characters with reliable round-trip-ability. So, we won't be needing
> to encode those as separate characters in Unicode (just in case anybody was
> wondering).
Although it is fairly straightforward, I don't know if anyone like
Google, MS or the Chinese telecom companies has actually implemented
a conversion between pre-composed Tibetan and Unicode - until they do,
round-tripping is hypothetical. The Pre-composed Tibetan standard
GB/T20524-2006 also uses a PUA character encoding ~ so the objection
that has been raised wrt using a PUA encoding for emoji, i.e. How
to determine which PUA convention is being used, applies here too.
- Chris
> Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 11 2009 - 03:35:07 CST