Quote/Cytat - Doug Ewell <d...@ewellic.org> (Sat 03 Oct 2015 08:00:12
PM CEST):
Sean Leonard wrote:
What I understand is that Draft 1 got shot down because it was at
variance with the nascent Unicode effort;
If I remember correctly, Draft 1 looked a lot like an updated and
expanded version of ISO 2022, much more than it did like today's
Unicode/10646.
Rob Pike, Ken Thompson
Hello World
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/utf.html
The draft of ISO 10646 was not very attractive to us. It defined a
sparse set of 32-bit characters, which would be hard to implement and
have punitive storage requirements. Also, the draft attempted to
mollify national interests by allocating 16-bit subspaces to national
committees to partition individually. The suggested mode of use was to
‘‘flip’’ between separate national standards to implement the
international standard.
Regards
Janusz
--
Prof. dr hab. Janusz S. Bień - Uniwersytet Warszawski (Katedra
Lingwistyki Formalnej)
Prof. Janusz S. Bień - University of Warsaw (Formal Linguistics Department)
jsb...@uw.edu.pl, jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl, http://fleksem.klf.uw.edu.pl/~jsbien/
