At 16:02 -0400 2005-08-14, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>Jonathon Blake wrote:
>>
>> Peter wrote:
>>
>> > Nowdays anyone in the world could reproduce much of the content
>>of WWS with an off-the-shelf OS.
>>
> > They would still have to create fonts for around a third of the
>writing systems.
>
>Which ones still aren't in Unicode?

You can see what is in Unicode and what is tentatively scheduled by
looking at the Roadmaps.

http://www.unicode.org/roadmaps/bmp/

and

http://www.unicode.org/roadmaps/smp/

>What does the Unicode-user do if they buy e.g. my fonts for scripts that
>haven't yet been incorporated?

Those fonts, like any other 8-bit fonts, are fine for setting text
and printing it. They will still work, most likely, though as time
goes on support for old fonts like that may wane. They aren't good
for data representation or interchange, however.

One thing that can be done is to have old fonts reencoded so that
they work properly with Unicode characters.
--
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com