On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 02:25:05PM +0900, Gaspar Sinai wrote:
> And the bottom line is: I don't really care if
> Unicode will admit that this is a problem. If
> my reasoning (not my screenshots) convince
> *some* people not to sign electronically unicode
> text I think I did those guys good - and that
> is enough satisfaction for me.
Why not just warn against signing documents with bidi in them? Odds are,
people who would run into this, if warned against using Unicode, would
use ISO-8859-6/8 - which is often ran through the same bidi algorithim.
And what if you don't do those guys good? They miss a multimillion
dollar account because they can't work with the client, or they fall for
something more common because they're worrying about Unicode?
-- David Starner - starner@okstate.edu, dvdeug/jabber.com (Jabber) Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org What we've got is a blue-light special on truth. It's the hottest thing with the youth. -- Information Society, "Peace and Love, Inc."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 04 2002 - 00:58:30 EST