On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:15:57PM +0000, David Hopwood wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:57:34PM +0000, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> > > MK> What we are trying to establish is the exact meaning that UNICODE
> > > MK> ought to have - that is, if it can have one at all.
> > >
> > > In the Unix-like world, the term ``UTF-8'' has been used quite
> > > consistently, and most documentation avoids using Unicode for a disk
> > > format (using it for the consortium, er., the Consortium, the
> > > character repertoire and, when useful, for the coded character set).
> > >
> > > The Unix-like public is used to thinking of UTF-8 as the format in
> > > which Unicode text is saved on disk, and ``UTF-8 (Unicode)'' or
> > > perhaps ``Unicode (UTF-8)'' should be the preferred user-interface
> > > item.
> >
> > I would rather recommend that you write ISO 10646 UTF-8 as the
> > ISO standard is a standard in many countries while Unicode is not.
>
> But ISO 10646 is not the same as Unicode:
When people specify a character set they are probably not
specifying the sorting order, character attrubures and such. Just the
encoding is enough. Other things are often set in a locale.
Furthermore there are ISO specs for many of these things, though not all.
Kind regards
Keld
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 17:39:25 EST