Unicode 5.2 -> 6.0

[Nicolas Williams]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 09:12:54PM -0700, Michel Suignard wrote:
> >From: Nicolas Williams
> >
> >The test I propose then is: if we can find a font that can render
> >once-PVALID-now-DISALLOWED characters, then grandfather (or consider
> >other factors), else don't.
> 
> I think someone (Ken?) already mentioned that, but you are always
> guaranteed to have few folks that have fonts to render every new
> characters added to Unicode. [...]

There was a confusing typo in the UC page announcing 6.0.  That page
said it was U+19_C_A that was being changed, and there is no glyph for
U+19CA, thus I thought this was much ado about nothing, an error in the
5.2 tables, say.

However, it's now clear that there was a typo on that page, and that the
correct codepoint was U+19DA, for which I certainly can see there is a
glyph.

Nico
--