latin1 explicitly doesn't define characters (or control codes) in those ranges, but unicode does. It doesn't directly follow that decoding a byte in those undefined ranges produces a unicode-point of equal value.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Doug Ewell <[email protected]> wrote: > To no avail? I’m not sure why your colleagues would not believe the > statement taken right out of the standard, or the mapping file taken from > the Unicode Web site, but would believe the Wikipedia article. > > If they think there is a mismatch, where do they think it is? > > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA > http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell > >
