<Peter_Constable at sil dot org> wrote: > A couple of corrections. First, if an app supports only WM_CHAR and > not also WM_UNICHAR, that does not imply that it uses a legacy > encoding. If running on NT/2K/XP and registered as a wide (Unicode) > app, the WM_CHAR messages will supply UTF-16 code units. If running > on Win9x/Me and registered as an ANSI app, the WM_CHAR messages > supply codepoints in some Windows codepage, but the app can still > store text as Unicode if it takes the WM_CHAR data and immediately > converts it. > > Secondly, the question of whether an app supports WM_UNICHAR in > addition to WM_CHAR has no direct bearing on what it puts onto the > clipboard -- the two are independent. If an app encodes text as > Unicode, though, it is true that it would probably include Unicode- > encoded plain text among the formats it copies to the clipboard.
Thanks for the corrections. I haven't actually played around with this very much, and I thought I understood more than I did about Unicode on the clipboard. (As I mentioned earlier, I should have said CF_TEXT and CF_UNICODETEXT rather than WM_CHAR and WM_UNICHAR.) The collected knowledge on this list is a real treasure, very helpful and enlightening. Thanks. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California