Markus Kuhn writes:
> If you do a Unicode to JIS X 0208 (not in the context of EUC-JP)
> conversion, *both* U+005C *and* U+FF3C should be mapped onto JIS X 0208
> code point 0x2140. This way you never loose anything.
>
> Is there anything wrong with this approach?
No, sounds reasonable.
> Is that any different from what iconv does at the moment, Bruno?
libiconv currently maps EUC-JP 0xA1C0 to U+005C, but after the
explanations of Hironori Sakamoto and the answer Tomohiro got from
[EMAIL PROTECTED], I will consider it a known bug in the unicode.org
table and change libiconv to map EUC-JP 0xA1C0 to U+FF3C. Same for all
other encodings which contain ASCII and JISX0208 (ISO-2022-JP etc.).
Bruno
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
