On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: Hi,
> > YUSCII (CROSCII) had many names (YUSCII, CP-999, CROSCII, CRO-437), > > and this was first > > implementation of our diacritics, and it was 7-bit codepage... > > And again - you are wright it was also called žabeceda, because @ > > that is implementation for Ž is before > > letter A :)) > > About proposed name, I think it would be ok something like > > CROSCII/SLOSCII (I would like to avoid > > HRYU and SLYU). Or maybe HR999/SL999 > I would like to keep two leading letters as ISO language code > so it should be HR and SL. In such case I think the best will > be HR999 and SL999. I spent some time with google and I've found that this encoding confirms ISO-646 7bit standard and its "official" name is: ISO-646-YU Later is was also called YUSCII, CROSCII and SLOSCII but these are not official names. It's probably the last ISO-646-?? encoding still used in real life anyhow it's possible that someone will want to add to Harbour some others ISO-646 CPs due to compatibility with some old hardware so I would like to keep full official name for internal Unicode table with references to other *SCII names. Then I suggest to use HR646 and SL646 as Harbour CP names. I hope that such proposition is reasonable. What's your opinion? I'll be thankful if you can answer yet about adding HR646C or updating HR646 (current HR437) to use strictly Clipper compatible collation order. What do you prefer? Or maybe current order is wrong? I've just checked that in xHarbour HR* CPs use the same character order as in Clipper but SL* CPs not and are Harbour compatible. What is the correct sort order? Is it different for Croatia and Slovenia? best regards, Przemek _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
