Re: Paper on the (misnaming) of the Han

• Next message: Markus Scherer: "Re: Rationale for U+10FFFF?"
• Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: U+xxxx, U-xxxxxx, and the basics"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

on 3/6/00 9:21 AM, Tom Emerson at Tree@basistech.com wrote:

> Possibly, though I'm surprised that the IRG would make a mistake like that.
> I believe that it is also the case that Suzhou and Hangzhou are
> geographically close to one another. It is an interesting conundrum (at
> least to me). Unfortunately mail to the IRG has remained unanswered.
>

The IRG didn't name them. They -- and their names -- go back to Unicode
1.0, which is rather earlier than the IRG.

=====
John H. Jenkins
jenkins@apple.com
tseng@blueneptune.com
http://www.blueneptune.com/~tseng

• Next message: Markus Scherer: "Re: Rationale for U+10FFFF?"
• Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: U+xxxx, U-xxxxxx, and the basics"
• 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 - 17:20:59 EDT