"The existing composites were included only out of necessity so that new Unicode implementations could interoperate with existing implementations using legacy industry-standard encodings." - Peter Constable
Are we saying we have exhausted such necessity? And what are these legacy-standard encodings? "No new composite values will be added". - Peter Constable The above sounds dictatorial in nature. Dele ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Constable" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 10:27 PM Subject: RE: Just if and where is the then? > > If a can have U+0061 and have a composite that is U+00e2...U+... > > If e can have U+0065 and have a composite that is U+00ea...U+... > > > > Then why is e with accented grave or acute and dot below cannot be > assigned > > a single unicode value instead of the combinational values 1EB9 0301 > and > > etc.... > > > > Since UNICODE is gradually becoming a defacto, I still think it will > not be > > a bad idea to have such composite values. > > The existing composites were included only out of necessity so that new > Unicode implementations could interoperate with existing implementations > using legacy industry-standard encodings. Apart from the backward > compatibility issue, these composites go against Unicode's design > principles and are not needed. > > No new composite values will be added. > > > > Peter > > Peter Constable > Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies > Microsoft Windows Division > > >
