Re: Frequent incorrect guesses by the charset autodetection in IE7

From: Sinnathurai Srivas (
Date: Fri Jul 14 2006 - 19:51:20 CDT

  • Next message: James Kass: "Re: Question about some characters"

    Taking Unicode into account (with ISO 10646), atleast 12 to 15 years of
    Unicode existence, one of the condition that ISO placed was that they will
    not register any more languages. The reason given was only Unicode will be
    allowed in the future.

    Unicode is not functioning properly, because ISO will not let go the ISO.
    ISO will not anounce the deprecation of ISO 8859-x. This means Unicode will
    not get through ISO systems.

    ISO did a grave unjust to many of the languages, (some 20 and counting)
    years of stagnation.

    Ofcourse Unicode is a great encoding. But ISO might have allowed both ISO
    and Unicode, while Unicode finds it's way to the top. Unfortunately Unicode
    is in the bottom of the pile, it might take years for acceptance by the

    It is now the duty of ISO to anounce the deprecation time table of
    IS)-8859-x, and ASCII, because they banned very many languages from using
    the ISO8859-x

    Microsoft and many other major coorporations gangedup to ban adding more
    languages to ISO8859-x. But they can not get Unicode to work properly yet.
    So it is the reponsibility of these major coorporations to ban all ISO8859

    As for Tamil attepts were made to encode Tamil for over 20 years now. This
    was denied.

    Tamil has a publishing industry built on 8bit encoding for years and years.
    Microsoft is now begining to punish Tamil by eliminating 8bit Tamil font
    access in the name of hacked codes, while gives superior support to
    established 8 bit encodings. While, graphis and other major softwares are
    not working at all with Unicode.

    Infact, as ISO announced the banning of any more registration of new
    ISO8859-x, after few years Iexisting ISO had become hacked and illegal.
    Hence all ISO8859-x are illegal codes. They must be deprecated as soon as
    possible, or if ISO thinks Unicode is not working yet, then they should
    allow new 8bit encodings, while Unicode matures.

    Hence ISO is an illegal code now.


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Doug Ewell" <>
    To: "Unicode Mailing List" <>
    Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 6:57 AM
    Subject: Re: Frequent incorrect guesses by the charset autodetection in IE7

    > 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 their
    > standards.
    > 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

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 14 2006 - 19:59:42 CDT