At 9:36 AM -0400 7/16/01, Patrick Rourke wrote:
>This is probably a FAQ, but I couldn't find it either in the Unicode
>archives on egroups or on the Apple website [which doesn't mean it's not
>there] . . . is there a distinction between the Unicode support in Carbon
>and Cocoa? For the ranges I'm interested in, the Carbon applications I've
>tried only seem to support the Unicode 1.0 character ranges, while Cocoa
>seems to support the Unicode 2.0 ranges (well, Learning Cocoa explicitly
>says it supports Unicode 2.0, and the Cocoa applications I have access to
>prove it). Also, OS9 applications, except for WorldText, seem to support
>Unicode 1.0, while WorldText seems to support 2.0. Am I guessing right that
>there is this distinction (that Carbon supports Unicode 1.0, while Cocoa
>supports Unicode 2.0), or am I just screwing up and OSX Carbon applications
>should be able to support the Unicode 2.0 ranges I'm interested in
>(primarily Greek extended)?
>
Provided a font is installed, Carbon can handle all of Unicode 3.0.
The only caveat is that applications have to be explicitly written to
take advantage of that support -- using ATSUI or MLTE for drawing,
for example.
Thus, to name one example, Internet Explorer is Carbonized but not
ATSUI-savvy, and so can't handle all of Unicode. Currently, most
Carbonized applications are not ATSUI-savvy.
WorldText is an MLTE-based application, hence it automatically gets
all of Unicode 3.0. Anything written to Cocoa automatically handles
Unicode, as well, since all text on Cocoa is Unicode.
--
=====
John H. Jenkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://homepage.mac.com/jenkins/
