From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Wed Dec 24 2003 - 05:50:17 EST
John Jenkins wrote:
> No, it was not. Han would have been unified even if there had been
> space not to do so.
I fully agree. Unicode would have been updated later to support
surrogates if CJK had been extended so much that it could no more
fit the full CJK set. Support of surrogates has been defined very
soon in both ISO10646 and Unicode, even if it was not used before
Unicode 3.2. The initial design of ISO10646 was also allowing for
more than 1 plane (in fact more than 17 planes was projected, as
there was then no consensus about how many planes would be
necessary given that there was no clear policy for allocation
of characters and definition of scripts.
ISO10646 could have followed a distinct path where each language
could have been encoded separately, but the choice to encode only
scripts has greatly reduced the needs for more planes, which was
reasonnable to project when you saw the explosion of encodings
that were soon to exceed the capabilities of ISO2022 and similar
8-bit code repertoires).
__________________________________________________________________
<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed Spam messages and set aside
Newsletters for me
You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 24 2003 - 06:30:30 EST