Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
So in effect, ZWNBSP still means "don't break", though the standard
says that so does the WORD JOINER and recommends that it be used
instead. In practice, there is hardly any system that does not
implement the ZWNBSP semantics but implements the WORD JOINER
semantics, but there are systems that do the opposite. This makes it
easy to decide which one is safer to use.
I don't agree with Yucca's basic argument here. For many years, there
was hardly any system that did not implement Unicode but implemented ISO
8859-1, but there were systems that did the opposite. For a lot of
vendors, this made it easy to decide which one was safer to use.
I'd be interested in seeing a partial list of systems or applications
that implement U+FEFF as ZWNBSP, with all of the (non-BOM) semantics
that implies, or existing texts that use U+FEFF for that purpose. I'd
be surprised if there were many.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14
www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell
