>>>>> "M.Carrasco" == Carrasco Benitez Manuel <manuel.carrasco@emea.eudra.org> writes:
M.Carrasco> Re-statement of the proposition In case someone has not
M.Carrasco> noticed, the euro is very, very, very important for the
M.Carrasco> Europeans. Much more than ASCII.
This is nonsense. Probably to most Europeans the Euro (currency) is
more important than the ASCII character set. To hardly any European
the Euro (character, glyph, character coding) is more important than
the ASCII character coding.
...
M.Carrasco> 20A0 "EURO-CURRENCY SIGN"
M.Carrasco> Only the glyph does not correspond. But as the standard
M.Carrasco> does not define the glyph (there are only indicative),
M.Carrasco> this could be considered a "typo" and just one needs just
M.Carrasco> correct the glyph (no back-editing). Hence, no need for
M.Carrasco> 20AC with all the confusion that this could add.
This is a possibility.
M.Carrasco> 2) 7 and 8 bits
M.Carrasco> First, one has to agree on:
M.Carrasco> - The euro is not necessary in 7 and/or 8 bits. - The
M.Carrasco> euro is necessary in 7 and/or 8 bits.
I don't think many people will find it necessary. In which areas do
you need to use this as a glyph ?
Probably not for monetary transactions, as there are probably numeric
codings for currency that make it possible to differentiate the
multitude of "dollars" and "pounds" in current use.
One use is in the printing of checks. This problem seems to have been
solved in many countries before, without changing character sets.
If there are applications that need them in HTML or other communication media,
*now* is the time to switch to 16 bit character sets.
...
M.Carrasco> 3) HTML
Unnecessary.
M.Carrasco> Regards Tomas
Is this a troll, perhaps, or are you changing names ?
Jost
-- Jost Krieger, Postmaster, Rechenzentrum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum Jost.Krieger@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:37 EDT