RE: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard

From: Jonathan Rosenne ([email protected])
Date: Wed May 12 1999 - 10:45:50 EDT

Next message: Daniel Michael McQuillen: "Re: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard"
Maybe in reply to: Ricardo Bermell Benet: "Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth Whistler [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 3:40 AM
> To: Unicode List
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard
>
>
> Dear Mr. Ricardo Bermell-Benet,

> > ¿Is it a subset? If so, why don't use ISO-10646 as a better
> (wider) standard.
>
> > ¿Is the diference that Unicode supplies algorithms?
>

From my point of view as a user of Hebrew, the major difference is that
Unicode specifies the bidi algorithm while ISO 10646 does not.

Jony

Next message: Daniel Michael McQuillen: "Re: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard"
Maybe in reply to: Ricardo Bermell Benet: "Unicode Standard & ISO-10646 Standard"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:46 EDT