- From: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:20:10 -0700
- To: "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <aharon@google.com>
- CC: Mohamed Mohie <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
In order for your Database to rely on this, you would need to know that whatever display tool you are using supports the new characters. The only way to surface this would be to create a new label (UBA-2) which would be a shorthand for compliance that includes these characters. The current Unicode compliance model allows implementers to arbitrarily subset the supported characters. This is fine for scripts, because there may be other reasons (lack of fonts, lack of rendering engines) why some implementation is unable to deal with, say Arabic, or Syriac. But it makes the situation totally unpredictable if applications are able to freely subset which Bidi FORMAT characters they support. UBA-2 would thus not only add these characters, but require that conformant applications support the whole set of bidi format characters fully. That way, your database could specify that it should be viewed with a browser supporting UBA-2, and all would be fine. A./ PS: I still believe having two models for isolate, i.e. a different one for CSS and Unicode, is a recipe for trouble.
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 18:20:51 UTC