|
In a message dated 11/5/2003 11:27:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My company is not the best example here; we're well behind the curve The other reason, is untill recently in Unicode 3.1 and 3.2. There are no characters defined beyond BMP. Even as today, while there many characters defined beyond the BMP in unicode 4.0, the software vendor may not care about those market which need those characters any way. In that case, the priority to support those are pretty low.
From my understanding, the only major market which mandate Surrogate support is only China. I never heard European, Japanese, or Korean govements mandate unicode support beyond BMP. China is the only one which mandate Plan 2 and the supprot of surrogate mapping with GB18030 . Have you see any marketing requirment from other countries / region require unicode surrogate support?
I am not saying there are no need in other places. I am saying the surrogate support (or the lack of it) in the software do not have huge "commercial" impact in other regions.
If you think Surrogate support is very important. Then IUC25 is a good chance for you to talk to "goverment" people. Maybe you should suggest them to put surrogate support into a law as what China did in 2000. (not really, they only require GB18030 support, but that "imply" Surrogate.)
==================================
Frank Yung-Fong Tang System Architect, I�t�rn�ti�n�l D�v�l�pme�t, AOL Int�r��t�v� S�rvi�es AIM:yungfongta mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel:650-937-2913 Yahoo! Msg: frankyungfongtan John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. Does your software display Thai language text correctly for Thailand users? -> Basic Conceptof Thai Language linked from Frank Tang's I�t�rn�ti�n�liz�ti�n Secrets Want to translate your English text to something Thailand users can understand ? -> Try English-to-Thai machine translation at http://c3po.links.nectec.or.th/parsit/ |
- Ill-formed sequences (was: Re: UTF-16 inside UT... Doug Ewell
- RE: Ill-formed sequences (was: Re: UTF-16 i... Addison Phillips [wM]
- Re: Ill-formed sequences (was: Re: UTF-... Doug Ewell
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Doug Ewell
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Peter Kirk
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Doug Ewell
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Philippe Verdy
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Philippe Verdy
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Philippe Verdy
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Doug Ewell
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 YTang0648
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Doug Ewell
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 John Cowan
- Re: UTF-16 inside UTF-8 Frank Yung-Fong Tang

