Re: Last Call: UTF-16, an encoding of ISO 10646 to Informational

From: John Cowan (cowan@locke.ccil.org)
Date: Mon Aug 16 1999 - 14:05:38 EDT

Next message: John Cowan: "Offtopic: ISO 3166"
Previous message: John Cowan: "Re: behaviour of ZWNBSP (was Re: Unicode and Kermit)"
Maybe in reply to: The IESG: "Last Call: UTF-16, an encoding of ISO 10646 to Informational"
Next in thread: schererm@us.ibm.com: "Re: Last Call: UTF-16, an encoding of ISO 10646 to Informational"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> In other words, registering two formats for UTF-16 complicates matters
> while bringing no benefits whatsoever.

The *formats* already exist. What is being registered here is
*names*. The question is whether all formats will have names,
or whether some will be nameless (but used anyway).

-- 
	John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan	cowan@ccil.org
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! / Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau / Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.
			-- Coleridge / Politzer

Next message: John Cowan: "Offtopic: ISO 3166"
Previous message: John Cowan: "Re: behaviour of ZWNBSP (was Re: Unicode and Kermit)"
Maybe in reply to: The IESG: "Last Call: UTF-16, an encoding of ISO 10646 to Informational"
Next in thread: schererm@us.ibm.com: "Re: Last Call: UTF-16, an encoding of ISO 10646 to Informational"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT