In <[email protected]>, on 06/13/2012
at 02:02 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> said:
>I hear everyone who is saying "the term 'code point' *really*
>means a bit value with a glyph assigned to it," but that's not
>what the definitions out there say. Wikipedia:
Wiki, while useful, is not reliable.
>If one is going to define "round trip conversion" as applying only
>to corresponding glyphs then the definition loses any meaning. Any
>rational translation is round trip with regard to corresponding
>glyphs.
No; there are conflicting requirements on the translation, one of
which is semantic integrity.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
