RE: ASCII as a subset of Unicode (was: Re: Oxford proposes a leaner alphabet)

From: Jonathan Rosenne (jr@qsm.co.il)
Date: Sat Apr 11 2009 - 15:46:56 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: ASCII as a subset of Unicode (was: Re: Oxford proposes a leaner alphabet)"

    -----Original Message-----
    > From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.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
    >> subset.
    >
    > 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.

    Jony

    > --
    > Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
    > http://www.ewellic.org
    > http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
    > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 11 2009 - 15:48:49 CDT