To: unicode(at)unicode.org
From: Andrew C. West andrewcwest(at)alumni.princeton.edu
Cc: Rick.Cameron(at)crystaldecisions.com
Received: (qmail 13384 invoked by uid 0); 12 Jul 2003 14:10:55 -0000

from unicode.org (209.235.17.55) by ns.need.bg with SMTP; 12 Jul
 2003 14:10:55 -0000

from sarasvati.unicode.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 
by unicode.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6CE6Ls09559; Sat, 
12 Jul 2003 10:06:22 -0400

with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list unicode); Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:06:21 
-0400 (EDT)

from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by 
unicode.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h6CE6Is09553 for ; Sat, 
12 Jul 2003 10:06:18 -0400

(cpmta 27016 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2003 07:06:16 -0700

from 209.228.33.249 (HELO mail.alumni.princeton.edu.criticalpath.net)
 by smtp.alumni.princeton.edu (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 12 Jul 2003 
07:06:16 -0700

from [212.140.114.93] by mail.alumni.princeton.edu with HTTP; Sat, 12
 Jul 2003 07:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 07:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
XMailer: Web Mail 5.4.0-4_sol28
MIMEVersion: 1.0
ContentType: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Subject: RE: Combining diacriticals and Cyrillic
Body: On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:09:08 -0700, Rick Cameron wrote:

> Ah, but what you don't realise [and it's not surprising, because MSDN
> doesn't make it clear] is that when ScriptTextOut calls ExtTextOut, it
> passes glyph indices, and uses the ETO_GLYPH_INDEX option. 
> 
> Thus, the two statements are perfectly consistent. For once, Philippe's
> bold statement of fact is right. ;^)
> 
> (BTW, the authority for my bold statement of fact above is a conversation
> with David Brown, the architect of Uniscribe)

Well, I had a sneaking suspicion that someone would prove me wrong on this one.
But having said that, I'm not entirely convinced. You seem to be saying that
ExtTextOut facilitates ScriptTextOut's use of it under Windows 2K and XP by
means of the ETO_GLYPH_INDEX option (surely the same would apply under NT4, 9X
and ME ?), but this is not the same as Philippe's assertion that under XP you
can call simply TextOut with a Unicode string and TextOut will utilise the
appropriate Uniscribe functions to render the text the same as if you had used
the Uniscribe API directly.

Andrew