On 10/5/2015 12:32 PM, Ken Whistler wrote:
>
> On 10/5/2015 8:24 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:
>> I too am puzzled as to what DIS 10646 and C1 control pictures have to do
>> with each other.
>>
>
> What an *excellent* cue to start a riff on arcane Unicode history!
>
> First, let me explain what I think Sean Leonard's concern here is.
>
> 1. On 10/4/2015 5:30 AM, Sean wrote: "I proposed adding C1 Control
> Pictures to
> Unicode. ... The requirement is that all glyphs for U+0000 - U+00FF be
> graphically distinct."
> [...]
> 2. The Unicode code charts are (deliberately) vague about U+0080, U+0081,
> and U+0099.
> [...]
> 3. Concerned about this gap, Sean did some due diligence research on the
> web[...] Hence the need to track down a copy of DIS 10646 (meaning in
> actuality, the appropriately numbered WG2 N666, "DIS 10646", dated
> November 4, 1990).
🔔🔔🔔🔔🔔!!! 👈🔨💅🔛😰!😃😃😃😃😃😃😃😅
🙏👓📖🌏💡🙌
-Sean
Received on Tue Oct 06 2015 - 06:16:01 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 06 2015 - 06:16:01 CDT