Compliant is a problem term, as compliance is a problem concept. I believe
we discussed, some months ago, the problem of claiming compliance for
systems or applications, since very little (any?) software implements
everything in Unicode or implements everything equally well. What would it
mean to say that a website is 'Unicode compliant'? Is there any point in
proclaiming a website 'Unicode compliant' if the visitor is using a browser
that is *not* Unicode compliant insofar as being able to correctly display
that site?
It is compliant in terms of using a correct and standardised way to provide Unicode. So compliant does apply to ANY valid UTF8 :o)
Compliant should mean to the user, that it doesn't break any Unicode rules. Valid UTF8 doesn't break any rules, so it is compliant.
"Compliant" is pretty perfect for what you mean, I'd think. Also, you can apply this term to software, but in a different sense.
--
Theodore H. Smith - Macintosh Consultant / Contractor.
My website: <www.elfdata.com/>
