Julian Bradfield <jcb plus unicode at inf dot ed dot ac dot uk> wrote:
>> Did you read what I wrote? The *underlying architecture* of Windows >> key handling supports neither additional shift states nor multiple >> dead keys, both of which are required to support this standard. A new >> version of MSKLC on top of the existing architecture will not help. > > Again, please could you explain how this is the case? Michael Kaplan, who developed MSKLC, has blogged about this quite a few times: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/michkap/ And yes, of course it's possible to stack an entire new layer on top of the existing Windows key architecture, as Keyman does. Maybe that is the long-term solution, but I haven't heard that MS is planning to go that route. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell