> "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?
Yes, because by definition legacy industry-standard encodings not in widespread usage prior to 1993 do not qualify for the backward-compatibility requirement. The necessity had to do with interoperation with existing implementations, not with the need to support particular languages / writing systems. For the latter, it has never been a necessity to add pre-composed characters. > And what are these legacy-standard encodings? > > "No new composite values will be added". - Peter Constable > > The above sounds dictatorial in nature. I'm simply telling you what the policy of the Unicode Consortium is. Peter Peter Constable Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies Microsoft Windows Division