Re: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters

• Previous message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters"
• In reply to: Ernest Cline: "RE: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters"
• Next in thread: Chris Jacobs: "[off topic] Klingon"
• Reply: Chris Jacobs: "[off topic] Klingon"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On 28/04/2004 12:00, Ernest Cline wrote:

>
>
>
> ...
>
>
>There will always be scripts that Unicode will not support, either because
>they are constructed scripts with no real use, rare or ancient scripts that
>lack sufficient examples to determine how the script should be encoded,
>or are picture fonts. This last we can discount, because the existing
>private use area supports them adequately. ...
>

Don't count on it. The PUA as Ken envisages it doesn't provide adequate
support for anything at all.

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter@qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/

• Next message: John Hudson: "Re: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters"
• Previous message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters"
• In reply to: Ernest Cline: "RE: Defined Private Use was: SSP default ignorable characters"
• Next in thread: Chris Jacobs: "[off topic] Klingon"
• Reply: Chris Jacobs: "[off topic] Klingon"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 28 2004 - 17:05:39 EDT