> David Starner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> There is a document at http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3271194620.html
After reading this article, I'm quite certain that (to quote the article): "CGS coverage of each language is much more comprehensive than Unicode's, and is more efficient to use". I'm quite, quite certain that claim is especially true for their Klingon support, since Unicode is so antique-20th-century and so very linguistically lame that it doesn't even support Klingon, despite the fact that (as the article claims) Klingon is one of the "12 languages that cover over 75% of the world's population". I mean, how could those Unicode people overlook support for Klingon? Sheesh...
If I were using Korean a lot, I'd certainly want to gain the speed advantages of CGS, which for Korean is "1500 times faster than Unicode"... And of course, a "patented" character set is just what everyone needs for world-wide interoperability!
Has anyone on this list used CGS? How can I can get a demo of their Klingon support?
iRckie the eGek
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GMU/CS/FA/L$ d+> s-:- a+ !c B X++++ P@? L@? E> W-@ N- ?o K w? O M V- PS? !PE Y? PGP? t@ 5? X? R* tv-- b++++ DI+(-) D? G e* h-- r+++ z+++?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:14 EDT