Re: Unicode support

[Dave Love]

>>>>> "WL" == Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

 WL> What you are talking about is Unicode level 1.  But to properly
 WL> support Indic languages more things have to be done.  Even simple
 WL> combining characters will have to be represented differently,
 WL> AFAIK.

For info, what needs to be done essentially differently for these
languages compared with existing support in Emacs?

For what it's worth, I did try a trivial proof of concept for Unicode
support (as I understand it) of Thai, based on thai-util.el and
post-read conversion.  As far as I could tell, it treated the level 2
example in Kühn's demo text correctly, but Mule-UCS is the only thing
against which I can compare.