Peter said: > People *really shouldn't* ask "Does product X support Unicode version > N?" They should be asking questions like "Can product X correctly > perform function Y on such-and-such characters added in Unicode version > N?"
And he's absolutely right. However, it is also clear that for the next decade at least people will continue to ask the wrong questions about products with regard to Unicode support, and we will continue to have to find ways to meaningfully field thos questions. It isn't really their fault. Outside the character mavens and the I18N engineers actually working on the implementations nobody can really be expected to understand the intricacies of the standard's development or the complications of rolling out various kinds of support for various groups of characters through API's and functional modules of complex, distributed systems. All they know is that Unicode 4.0 has been published, that "supporting Unicode" is a good thing, and that product X is reputed (or claims) to support Unicode 2.0 --- or whatever. If nothing else, we have to find ways to answer the unanswerable questions for government agencies, because they will find ways to require support for Unicode Version N.N in procurement processes, just like they find ways to require support for GB 18030, for example. --Ken
