[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Whither ANSI X3.64? (was Re: Suggested character set policy forthe IETF)
- To: IETF Charsets <ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM>
- Subject: Re: Whither ANSI X3.64? (was Re: Suggested character set policy forthe IETF)
- From: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:03:37 +0000 (GMT)
- Autoforwarded: false
- Disclose-recipients: prohibited
- Hop-count: 2
- Importance: normal
- In-reply-to: <v03102829aff9a7ee360f@[205.149.180.135]>
- MR-Received: by mta REDMS1.MUAS; Relayed; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:03:37 +0000
- MR-Received: by mta RE5; Relayed; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:04:34 +0000
- MR-Received: by mta RITIG4; Relayed; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:03:24 +0000
- Priority: normal
- UA-content-id: 11B7B4432500
- X400-MTS-identifier: [;4237031722071997/A31454/REDMS1]
Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
> > (And it isn't like similar machinery doesn't already exist in ANSI X3.4
> > under the general rubric of "control character", BTW.)
>
>
> I recently learned that the 8-bit ASCII spec (X3.64-1979) was pulled a few
> years ago. This is the spec which defines the 'C1' control characters that
> commandeer the #128-159 range in ISO-8859-1. Can anyone explain this?
The #128-159 range is defined by ISO 6429.
> Does
> it mean that the C1 range is now safe to use for graphic characters?
No.
> And is
> there any official set of glyphs for that range (Eudora's mapping seems to
> work as expected...)?
How about:
128: ?
129: ?
...
158: ?
159: ?
Misha
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.