Re: Level of Unicode support required for various languages

Date: Tue Oct 30 2007 - 18:58:47 CST

  • Next message: "Re: Level of Unicode support required for various languages"

    Dear John,

    after doing a check based on the IDS I can find no unifiable variant of
    <U+2FF5 U+9580 U+9F8D>. I checked twice, first after the orginal
    posting and again after your posting.


    Quoting "John H. Jenkins" <>:

    > On Oct 30, 2007, at 3:06 PM, Ben Monroe wrote:
    >> Yes, my surname.
    >> I mentioned it around March 2002 on this list.
    >> You may find it in L2/07-161 (Index UTC00119) and the status is
    >> "Not to encode".
    > Ah, OK.
    > First of all, this character wasn't "rejected" per se, and certainly
    > not by the IRG.
    > The "not to encode" status is supposed to mean that either it's already
    > encoded or is a variant of an already encoded variant. (Not
    > necessarily a unifiable variant, BTW.) I have an action item to wrap
    > all of the variants into a registered variant set under UTS 37.
    > However, in this case I'm left scratching my head. This should not
    > have the "not to encode" status. I don't know how that happened, but
    > it was a mistake, and I've altered the status to reflect this.
    > =====
    > John H. Jenkins

    This message sent through Virus Free Email

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 30 2007 - 19:00:40 CST