In a message dated 2001-03-16 5:36:14 Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] responded to Thomas Chan: > > I'm not sure about the "universality" of any of these; the emphasis seems > > to be mostly on kanji--they can only be a regional [Japanese] alternative > > to Unicode. > > Also I do not think it is a wise observation to trivialize the subject > they throw in as a Japanese regional alternative. I don't think Thomas's intent was to "trivialize" TRON by labeling it as a Japanese-specific alternative to Unicode. Most "universal" character sets invented since Unicode seem to have been designed by those dissatisfied with Unicode's handling of their own particular script -- Chinese, Indic, and especially Japanese -- and really only address the special needs of that one script. TRON is a Japanese-invented example of this. Notice that you never, but never, see a new character encoding proposal claiming to be superior to Unicode that really provides any kind of improved support for CJK *and* Indic scripts *and* Arabic. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California
