From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jul 14 2006 - 00:57:38 CDT
Sinnathurai Srivas <sisrivas at blueyonder dot co dot uk> wrote:
> An important mater is that all new iso8859-x encodin were banned for
> nearly 20 years now.
This seems unlikely since the Unicode and ISO 10646 projects started
less than 20 years ago, and ISO did not offer a replacement for the ISO
8859 family until ISO 10646.
In fact, some of the later-numbered parts of ISO 8859 (part 10 and
beyond) were originally published less than 10 years ago.
> This means support was forth coming from Microsoft and all major
> players from since 20 years ago.
ISO does not speak for whether Microsoft or anyone else will support
That said, Microsoft was certainly one of the first "major players" to
offer support for Unicode. It is unfortunate that the default encoding
for IE (and OE) is not one of the Unicode forms, but there is a huge
difference between that and "Microsoft does not support Unicode."
> Unfortunatly, the illegal hacked ASCII and hacked ISO8859 are still
> the default of these major players.
Please define "illegal" in this context.
-- Doug Ewell Fullerton, California, USA http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 14 2006 - 01:01:33 CDT