Re: comments on the offic.standpoint of Japan

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>]

> Please find enclosed the comments regarding the 
> Japan approach of the use of UCS-2 (ISO 10646)
> and UCS-4 comming from Canada. It seems that Ohta san proposals
> are not in line with the official Jpanase stand point.

What? Do you think my proposal on ICODE/IUTF is in line with the
official Jpanase stand point (whatever the official Jpanase stand
point means). It's not, of course. ICODE/IUTF is my pet project
and I don't want it be spoiled by ISO.

In general, in IETF, I'm trying to represent rough consensus of Japanese
IP community, within which there are several JIS committee members
involved.

Or, if you are referring "ISO-2022-JP-2", its extension "ISO-2022-INT-1"
is now being worked on by APCCIRN I18N group which will appear as an
internet draft soonly.

> Then I read the Japanese Position on an extension of UCS (N938): I tend to
> agree with Professor Shibano that either UCS-2 is used as is or then we leap to
> UCS-4 if extensions are needed.

The statement is that: UCS will be used as UCS-2 or UCS-4, which is
virtually meaningless.

So, could you make any technical contribution to the discussion on
charset issues?

						Masataka Ohta