latin1 explicitly doesn't define characters (or control codes) in those
ranges, but unicode does.
It doesn't directly follow that decoding a byte in those undefined ranges
produces a unicode-point of equal value.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Doug Ewell <doug_at_ewellic.org> wrote:
> To no avail? I’m not sure why your colleagues would not believe the
> statement taken right out of the standard, or the mapping file taken from
> the Unicode Web site, but would believe the Wikipedia article.
>
> If they think there is a mismatch, where do they think it is?
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
> http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell
>
>
Received on Fri Nov 16 2012 - 16:42:42 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Nov 16 2012 - 16:42:42 CST