At 04:49 AM 07/12/2000 -0800, Antoine Leca wrote:
> > The problem would go away if the ISO would get their heads out of
> > their a$$ and drop the C1 junk from the NEW 'TOUCHED UP" 8859s and
> > put the CP125x codes there.
>Sorry. It may work for CP1252/iso-8859-1, and CP1254/iso-8859-9,
>but won't for the others.
Note - I am not SAYING to use the CP-125x glyphs in my suggested C1-less
8859s - only that doing so will make life much easier. I'd love for ISO to
also issue on for the MacRoman/ISO translation so that Apple gets an
Official Supported x80-x9F mapping like I'm suggesting for Win-Latinx.
> Since Windows starts with the same letter as
>Word --or is the reason that they both come from the same company.
>No! I cannot believe that-- there are a couple of requirements
>that makes effectively the "other" codepages slighty incompatible,
>such as the necessary presence for · at position B5 (because this
>is the character Word uses when you ask it to "display" the spaces,
>and this is hard-coded in the product).
Last time I looked, B5 was not in the x80-x9F C1 range where CP125x differs
from ISO-8859-x. Thus this is a non-issue.
>- Windows HTML-tools/MAs are reluctant to add the test for presence
>of non-Latin1 characters to either tag as iso-8859-1 or
>windows-1252. Apparently they are too lazy (because they already
>did such a test for ASCII).
I agree with this statement. Since the scan is there it is not that hard to
change it to test for the x80-x9F and xA0-xFF ranges separately and have
separate flags for the two cases.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:05 EDT