At 01:32 PM 02/10/2000 -0500, Frank da Cruz wrote:
>Robert A. Rosenberg said:
> >
> > The same applies here. Use the Windows-125x charset designation if that is
> > what is actually being used (ie: there are x80-x9F characters). Unless you
> > can show where there is a mismatch in the x00-x7F and/or xA0-xFF
> > glyphs/characters between ISO-8859-1 and Windows-1252 (or one of the other
> > 125x sets and the corresponding 8859 set) I fail to see why "Windows code
> > pages are NOT just "extended" ISO 8859-x's" (just as ISO-8859-1 is an
> > extended version of USASCII). How is a file created on a Windows machine
> > (in CP1252) not a valid Latin1 file so long as it does not contain the
> > extra 32 characters/glyphs that MS added in the x80-x9F codepoint range?
> >
>It is. But the same is not true for the other Windows code pages. I
>thought it would be until I actually looked. Compare CP1250 and Latin-2,
>CP1251 and Latin/Cyrillic, etc.
OK. I'll do so. At least we agree that CP1252 IS an extension of
ISO-8859-1/Latin1 <g>.
>- Frank
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT