From: Mark Davis (mark@macchiato.com)
Date: Tue Sep 16 2008 - 04:38:09 CDT
> except an informative note that these characters may need some
attention in environments using Unicode.
This is a bit peculiar. I can't think of a significant implementation of
10646 that doesn't implement it via Unicode (or at least attempt it), so
saying this is like having a biology manual with "an informative note that X
may need some attention in environments where life is carbon-based."
Mark
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Karl Pentzlin <karl-pentzlin@acssoft.de>wrote:
> Searching the ISO/IEC 10646:2003 documents (as found on
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html )
> for "canonical", "equivalence", "deprecat" does not yield anything
> regarded to the Unicode concepts of "canonical equivalence" and
> "deprecation".
> Thus, any standard which refers to ISO/IEC 10646 neither can nor needs
> to reference to these Unicode character properties, as long as it does
> not formally reference explicitly to Unicode also.
>
> Is this conclusion correct?
>
> Especially, I am involved in the preparing of a Committee Draft of
> the next version of the keyboard related standard ISO/IEC 9995-3
> "Complementary layouts of the alphanumeric zone of the alphanumeric
> section".
> This standard refers to the following ISO 10646 characters:
>
> U+0149 LATIN SMALL LETTER N PRECEDED BY APOSTROPHE
> (which is deprecated now in Unicode)
> U+2126 OHM SIGN
> (which in Unicode has a canonical equivalence to:
> U+03A9 GREEK CAPITAL LETTER OMEGA)
>
> Thus, as in ISO 10646 these characters are ordinary characters
> without any special properties, they do not need any special treatment
> except an informative note that these characters may need some
> attention in environments using Unicode.
>
> Is this the correct way?
>
> - Karl Pentzlin
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 16 2008 - 09:43:59 CDT