From: Jonathan Rosenne (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Apr 11 2009 - 15:46:56 CDT
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 10:27 PM
> To: Unicode Mailing List
> Subject: Re: ASCII as a subset of Unicode (was: Re: Oxford proposes a leaner alphabet)
> Hans Aberg <haberg at math dot su dot se> wrote:
>>> The set of ASCII characters is a proper and intact subset of the set
>>> of Unicode characters.
>> Is this really true?
>> I though ASCII defined its characters as bytes, whereas Unicode uses
>> code-points which when mapped using UTF-8 will contain the ASCII as a
> The *set of characters* in ASCII is a proper and intact subset of
> Unicode. How these characters are represented inside computer storage
> and transmission protocols may be defined differently, and doesn't
> affect my argument that "ASCII characters" and "Unicode characters" are
> not disjoint sets.
> Actually, I was under the impression that ASCII was defined in terms of
> 7-bit code units, whereas there are virtually no computers or users
> today who think in terms of 7-bit code units.
There weren't such computers then, it was a communication code and 7 bits were used for communication.
> Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 11 2009 - 15:48:49 CDT