[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: printable multibyte encodings
> May be is not a bad idea to have a regional standard just for China and
It is a bad idea if we MUST have a regional standard, because it is not
> but your statements about Europe/Chine and Europe/Japan are not
What I said is that it is bad if we MUST have regional standard and,
thus, IS correct.
> But, ISO 10 646 contain Unicode, do you plan to initiate a
> new ISO work?
What? ISO work? Shall we throw away RFC822 and use X.400, then? Do you know
where are we?
> I do understand that ISO 10 646 is far away to be perfect
> but we do not have now anything else agreed on international level.
We already have and are actually using ISO 2022, which is far away perfect
but far better than 10646.
Followings are less interesting part:
> but we learnt that this sort of
> "unification" was agreed between the three delegations and was offered as
> common solution
Agreed by some European countries, but not by Japan.
There was once a conference on how to (not whether) unify Han characters
to which Japanese delegations were sent and still fought agaist unificaiton
itself in vain. Of course, it does not mean Japan has approved unification.
> Yes, it is correct that
> that was a result of the Unicoders pressure but isn't it much better to have
> a sort of compromise supported by the major vendors of software applications
> then a standard supported by all national bodies but not by the vendors?
Having an unusable (as an internationalized character code set) standard
as a universal code set is no better than anything.
> >> Readers new to Masataka Ohta's comments should know that they are
> >> extremely controversial and do not actually represent the opinion of the
> >> Japanese.
> >What? Can you explain why Japanese comittee vote AGAINST DIS 10646-1.2?
> >Because my opinion is typical in Japan.
> See my message above.
> >As far as I know, all experts in Japanese branches of American companies
> >(including those who support Unicode) think DIS 10646-1.2 is unusable as
> >an internationalized character code set.
> This is not true if Unicode is considered as a BMP of ISO 10 646. Many companise
> had declared a support to Unicode.
Of course, many American companies (including those who support Unicode)
have declared support to Unicode, regardless of objections from thier
branches in Japan.
So what? Don't say 'not true' if what you show is not counter example.