Elliotte Harold wrote:
> If we were to issue a new version of XML now, then Unicode 5.0 would
> suffice for all our lifetimes and likely way beyond. In fact, Unicode
> 3.0 pretty much took care of the last cases anyone is ever remotely
> likely to need.
Is that true? Khmer and Mongolian are very much living languages, the
Wikipedia article on Amharic suggests that it uses Ethiopic characters,
new material in Cherokee has been showing up on the Web in Unicode, and
Canadian Syllabics seem to be used for a wide variety of Cree languages.
When I look at the *huge* impact that Unicode has had for making ancient
Greek easier to manipulate and exchange, I'd hate to deny that same
privilege to speakers of these languages. You may feel that math
characters are more important than characters in these languages, but
native speakers and scholars who work with these languages may disagree.
Jonathan
