Dan Kogai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >On Monday, April 1, 2002, at 07:33 , Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >> Dan Kogai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I think I have found the reason why some of the encodings were >>> missing >>> from Tcl's *.enc, which later turned into *.ucm. >>> Apple makes use of Unicode compound characters too extensively, which >>> doesn't go well with .ucm, not to mention *.enc >> >> encengine can convert UTF-8 sequences for sequences of >> characters - but .ucm would need tweaking to allow >> multiple <UNNNN>: >> >> <UNNNN><UMMMM> \xYYYY > > I have recently found this undocumented feature but dared not use it.
I was not aware it was actually implemented ;-) > I think it looks better if it were written as > ><UNNNN+UMMMM> \xYY\xYY .... I don't like the <UNNNN+UMMMM> part it will make the parsing messier. The \xYY\xYY is of course what I meant ;-) > > it won't take much effort to fix it. I think I can work it out >myself. Should we feed this back to IBM? Why not? > >> We would have to be "sure" that Unicode was normalized as well. > > Right. This is rather a tough part but Apple is one of the loudest >advocate of Unicode so I *think* their map is correct. > >Dan the Encode Maintainer -- Nick Ing-Simmons http://www.ni-s.u-net.com/
