How about for KANNADA Language of Karnataka State. What do KANNADA has ?
What is available for KANNADA in UNICODE ?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:53 PM, <doug_at_ewellic.org> wrote:
> **It certainly is for Tamil.
>
> --Doug
>
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"V. M. Kumaraswamy" <ekavivmk_at_gmail.com>
> *Sender: *unicode-bounce_at_unicode.org
> *Date: *Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:26:44 -0700
> *To: *Jonathan Rosenne<jonathan.rosenne_at_gmail.com>; <anbu_at_peoplestring.com
> >
> *Cc: *<unicode_at_unicode.org>
> *Subject: *Re: 8 bits preference?
>
> This is what Govt. of TAMILNADU, INDIA has mandated:
>
> In the report, the Committee recommended that Tamil Nadu Government migrate
> from all legacy 8-bit encodings like TAB/TAM as well as other proprietary
> encoding to 16-bit encoding. The Committee recommended Unicode as the main
> 16-bit encoding to be used in all applications where support for Tamil is
> available.
>
> *Is this 16-Bit encoding ?
>
> *
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Jonathan Rosenne <
> jonathan.rosenne_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Because it is the most convenient byte size, considering that computers
>> are binary.
>>
>> I did once, in 1963, work on a computer with a byte size of 15, but I
>> don't think it was very convenient for textual data. We packed two 6 bit BCD
>> characters in each byte. Before that I worked on a computer with a word size
>> of 48 bits, and we packed eight 6 bit BCD characters in each word. Only
>> slightly less inconvenient. And getting the text to include Hebrew and
>> English required additional information, not directly encoded.
>>
>> Thank goodness we are where we are today with Unicode.
>>
>> Jony
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: unicode-bounce_at_unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce_at_unicode.org] On
>> > Behalf Of anbu_at_peoplestring.com
>> > Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 8:54 PM
>> > To: unicode_at_unicode.org
>> > Subject: 8 bits preference?
>> >
>> > Why are codes preferred in multiples of 8?
>> >
>> > Anbu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Mon Jun 27 2011 - 18:48:07 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 27 2011 - 18:48:07 CDT