Yung-Fong Tang wrote: > By printing a glyph for those character in the GB18030, it really > DEFINED what those characters should be in Unicode- which I think is not
It does not make it a character from the point of view of the Unicode standard, but it amounts to an "agreement between sender and recipient" that if they interpret the data in a GB 18030-related context, they treat this code point as being assigned this character. It's like agreeing to have Seuss characters there and printing something with a code chart with the Seuss characters. You may want to get a font that is designed for GB 18030 and see if it shows that glyph for that code point. Using such a font should be sufficient to enter into the above "agreement". Similarly, when you are on a Windows or IBM or Apple machine and you display PUA code points, you will want to display the glyphs/characters that Windows respectively IBM or Apple assign there, at least with _some_ font(s). markus
