From: Mark Davis (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 25 2004 - 23:45:10 CST
Yes, this is a misrepresentation. Both committees work together to ensure
that the repertoire is identical.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Ewell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Unicode Mailing List" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Philippe Verdy" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 13:59
Subject: Relationship between Unicode and 10646 (was: Re: Shift-JIS
> Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
> >> UTF-8 is an encoding of the Unicode character set.
> > More exactly, UTF-8 is an encoding of the ISO/IEC 10646 character
> > set...
> > Unicode by itself is not a character set, only an implementation of
> > the ISO/IEC 10646 character set...
> > Of course the Unicode technical commitee may propose new assignments
> > to ISO/IEC, but this is still ISO/IEC 10646 which maintains the
> > repertoire and approves or rejects the proposals. A new character
> > proposal may be rejected by Unicode, but accepted by ISO/IEC 10646;
> > and it is the ISO/IEC 10646 vote that prevails (so Unicode will have
> > to accept this ISO/IEC decision, even if it has voted against it in a
> > prior decision).
> I'd have to defer to the actual UTC and WG2 members, but my feeling is
> that this badly misrepresents the relationship between Unicode and
> 10646, and between their respective standardization bodies.
> My impression is that Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646 are two distinct
> standards, administered respectively by UTC and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2,
> which have pledged to work together to keep the standards perfectly
> aligned and interoperable, because it would be destructive to both
> standards to do otherwise. I don't think of it at all as the "slave and
> master" relationship Philippe describes.
> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 25 2004 - 23:48:36 CST