[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
UTF-2 and standardization
- To: ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM
- Subject: UTF-2 and standardization
- From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald.t.alvestrand@delab.sintef.no>
- Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 12:53:13 +0200
- Resent-message-id: <01H1989ES0IQ984SX2@INNOSOFT.COM>
- X400-Content-type: P2-1984 (2)
- X400-MTS-identifier: [/PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/;930802125313]
- X400-Originator: harald.t.alvestrand@delab.sintef.no
- X400-Received: by mta aun.uninett.no in /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed;Mon, 2 Aug 1993 12:53:20 +0200
- X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed; Mon,2 Aug 1993 12:53:16 +0200
- X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed; Mon,2 Aug 1993 12:53:13 +0200
- X400-Recipients: ietf-charsets@innosoft.com
Hi,
I am told that someone managed to get UTF-2 defined in the
soon-to-be-published ISO 9945-2 standard (POSIX part 2: Shells and tools,
which is also published as IEEE 1003.2)
Can anyone confirm/deny this?
I'm sure we know the advantages of sticking with a defined standard if
there is one....
(If we go for the private-use version of Otha's suggestion, this would
affect only the encoding method, not the basic character set)
Harald Tveit Alvestrand