-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Doug Ewell wrote: > Martin Kochanski <unicode at cardbox dot net> wrote: > > > To look at it another way, virtually the only action that the Unicode > > Consortium needs to take to define UNRENDERED CHARACTER is to promise > > never to define a character at that code point. > > I think this is exactly what they have done by creating the > "noncharacters" from U+FDD0 through U+FDEF. These code points are > guaranteed never to be assigned to real characters.
See conformance clause C5 (as modified by UAX #27 / Unicode 3.1): # C5 A process shall not interpret a noncharacter code point as an # abstract character. # # - The code points may be used internally, such as for sentinel values # or delimiters, but should not be exchanged publicly. So using those code points to represent an unrenderable character in data that is exchanged publicly, is not conformant. > My recommendation: Use the noncharacters. That's what they're there > for. No, they're for internal use. - -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/ RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5 0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01 Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBPUnTEDkCAxeYt5gVAQFqNQf/aSqEzAOJ+H/Wpx9rOcSY4oBdxGsV5gzR gchqTB2m0pDW4AQuvprHt5bI2fdXJ1R+x1LcgAubcIrvbJr5gBL+XXlgr/WE1/kz C4R827OWueXdy7J5hn2Zq8tJoVfDEB+N3jXxmn7aQ7ZZWq3SF72zV9X5t/G1Ds+I etYSoCIxq1nhp10ajIEAthHYPejmdJDJ2fuL6jpl1oxY2o9m92J0hL3HxrDhe2cQ N28lVY8rdrerhF3ZQhAKI5Hy7ALXLP4mk8GVBxFZ0z7jp+zZHHF3wQudLeAohU7Z RV54Dup9s9G+XrWJLAfaaEXm/8ZfMyJyjsIgXKVWbcNk1dPBbQ9dvQ== =+OSe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
