Thanks all. My current understand is such:
Latin1 explicitly gives no semantics to several byte values (for example
0x81), but acknowleges that other standards will define their semantics.
Unicode provides code-points with equally-undefined semantics so that these
bytes can pass through without change.
This allows a byte-level system using control codes in those ranges to
interact with a unicode-aware system, without loss of information.
Does that summarize well?
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Doug Ewell <doug_at_ewellic.org> wrote:
> Buck Golemon wrote:
>
> latin1 explicitly doesn't define characters (or control codes) in
>> those ranges, but unicode does.
>>
>
> See Ken's comment about Chapter 16. Both ISO 8859-1 and Unicode defer the
> *actual interpretation* of control characters to ISO 6429, which is what
> you are looking for.
>
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
> http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell
>
>
Received on Fri Nov 16 2012 - 16:53:35 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Nov 16 2012 - 16:53:35 CST