Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 13:37:51 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: kaleb@x.org (Kaleb S. KEITHLEY) Cc: phk@critter.tfs.com, hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Policy on printf format specifiers? Message-ID: <199509182037.NAA08516@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199509181712.NAA15302@exalt.x.org> from "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" at Sep 18, 95 01:12:17 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Er, I don't have my copy of 10646 here at home. As I recall page 0 > > > is just Latin1. If page 0 is in fact Unicode, which already has > > > encodings for every written language on Earth, then what would > > > 10646 need any other pages for? > > The rest of the languages of course. :-) > > If page 0 (sic) is Unicode, which has *all* the languages, then what would > the "rest of the languages" be? Dead languages, or live languages currently without written representations, being languages of a preliterate culture. > > Remember that the american continent wasn't with for until they found it... > > I can't parse this. Would somebody translate into German or Spanish for me? I can't parse it either. 8-). > > As far as I recall there is still some concern about Sanskrit and 10646 > > isn't there ? Sanskrit is supported. > Does 10646 have Cuneiform? No. It is a character set standard, not a glpyh encoding standard. So of course it does not have Cuneiform. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509182037.NAA08516>