Re: Java char and Unicode 3.0+ (was:Canonical equivalence in rendering: mandatory or recommended?)

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Thu Oct 16 2003 - 13:18:23 CST

Next message: Rick McGowan: "Re: Beyond 17 planes, was: Java char and Unicode 3.0+"
Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: Beyond 17 planes, was: Java char and Unicode 3.0+"
In reply to: John Cowan: "Re: Java char and Unicode 3.0+ (was:Canonical equivalence in rendering: mandatory or recommended?)"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Java char and Unicode 3.0+ (was:Canonical equivalence in rendering: mandatory or recommended?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Philippe Verdy scripsit:

> > What would happen if ISO10646 decided to stop its work, giving up to let
>> IANA contract with external registrars, just to comply with an rapid
>> industry need to publish more medias and still interoperate?

There would be utter chaos, and some character tsar would have to be
appointed as has been done for RFC 3066, and it would be a right
bloody mess.

-- 
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  * http://www.evertype.com

Next message: Rick McGowan: "Re: Beyond 17 planes, was: Java char and Unicode 3.0+"
Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: Beyond 17 planes, was: Java char and Unicode 3.0+"
In reply to: John Cowan: "Re: Java char and Unicode 3.0+ (was:Canonical equivalence in rendering: mandatory or recommended?)"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Java char and Unicode 3.0+ (was:Canonical equivalence in rendering: mandatory or recommended?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 18 2007 - 15:54:24 CST