[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: An argument against multiple character sets

To: bill@mail.nic.nu (J. William Semich)
Subject: Re: An argument against multiple character sets
From: "Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 22:55:35 +0900
Cc: Patrik F$BgM(J tstr$B‹N(J <paf@swip.net>, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>, idn@ops.ietf.org, pvm@a21.com
Delivery-date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 06:10:45 -0800
Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com

At 21:33 00/01/26 -0500, J. William Semich wrote:
> OK, Patrick, now I see your issues.

> >'$B%H(J' is one position in the Unicode tables.
> >'$Bg(J is a different position in the tables.
> 
> In this case, why not continue the current practice of downsizing to
> lowercase characters only? So then,where '=C4' is one position in the
> UNICODE tables and
> '=E4' is a different position in the tables (forming the uppercase and
> lowercase versions of "a-double-dot"), it would make sense to case-fold them. 

Sorry, but can we agree to only use ASCII for these characters?
My mailer doesn't handle Latin-1 any more than yours
handles Japanese, I guess. Many thanks in advance,     Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, World Wide Web Consortium
#-#-#  mailto:duerst@w3.org   http://www.w3.org

Prev by Date: Re: An argument against multiple character sets
Next by Date: Re: Unofficial web site for this mailing list
Prev by thread: Re: An argument against multiple character sets
Next by thread: Re: An argument against multiple character sets
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread