Re: Unicode 4.0 and ISO10646-2003

From: Frank Yung-Fong Tang (ytang0648@aol.com)
Date: Thu Apr 22 2004 - 18:36:49 EDT

Next message: Antoine Leca: "Re: [OT] Even viruses are now i18n!"

Previous message: Eric Muller: "Re: GB18030 and super font"
In reply to: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Unicode 4.0 and ISO10646-2003"
Next in thread: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Unicode 4.0 and ISO10646-2003"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Kenneth Whistler wrote on 4/22/2004, 3:26 PM:

> Frank asked:
>
> > I expect there are no difference from Unicode 4.0, am I right?
>
> Correct. Please see Appendix C of Unicode 4.0, p. 1348 and p. 1350,
> which already explicitly makes this statement.
>
> --Ken

I don't see "ISO10646-2003" in the page you mentioned. Is that equal to
the so-called "the thrid version"? There are no easy to tell
"ISO10646-2003" is equal to the so-called "the third version" :)
Although I guess that is the case.

Next message: Antoine Leca: "Re: [OT] Even viruses are now i18n!"
Previous message: Eric Muller: "Re: GB18030 and super font"
In reply to: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Unicode 4.0 and ISO10646-2003"
Next in thread: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Unicode 4.0 and ISO10646-2003"
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 Apr 22 2004 - 19:19:17 EDT