From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 13:52:53 CDT
I wrote:
> > Could I then see the documented and minuted rationale for using a
> static (non-
> > productive) Arabic character encoding model? What were the issues
and
> risks the
> > WG2 looked at before making its decision not to encode combining
> arabic three dots,
> > two dots, etc.? Or did it just follow what the UTC had decided for
it?
>
> I'm sure it did not follow UTC, since you're asking about a decision
> that I believe would have been taken back around 1989 or so before WG2
> and UTC were interacting.
In October of 1989, WG2 accepted the recommendations of an ECMA task
force on Arabic encoding. The ECMA task force was responsible for
8859-6. WG2 never considered encoding Arabic using a generative model
because it was never proposed to them.
Peter Constable
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 13:53:25 CDT