Re: Article in Financial Times; Feb 7, 2001

From: J M Sykes (
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 10:33:16 EST

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Everson" <>
To: "Unicode List" <>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Article in Financial Times; Feb 7, 2001

> At 04:48 -0800 2001-02-08, J M Sykes quoted the FT:
> >The International Standards Organisation (ISO) has now agreed to give
> >standard meanings to these remaining codes.
> Which as everyone knows, is really the International Organization for
> Standardization (ISO).

Quite, but I've become so accustomed to these two errors over the years that
these days they only makes me wince a little.

I believe 'ISO' was a compromise whose acceptability was reinforced by the
dictionary meaning:

iso- comb. form.
1 Used in wds adopted f. Gk and in Eng. wds modelled on these, and as a
freely productive pref., mainly in scientific and technical use, w. the
sense `equal'.

Which must be one of the most cryptic dictionary entries I've seen in a
month or two!


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:18 EDT