On Apr 23, 2007, at 16:52 UTC, Arnaud Nicolet wrote: > Le 23 avr. 07 à 18:43 Soir, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit: > > > No, legacy encodings were defined all over the world. Unicode was > > defined by an international consortium. > > Thank you. > I wonder, then, why those encodings also include the ASCII part.
Because that's very convenient. ASCII came first, and there was a lot of ASCII data around. When designing a new encoding, if you make it a superset of ASCII, then all that older data is still valid in your new encoding. > Should not the ASCII be an independent encoding? It is. But pretty much any language has at least occasional need for those ASCII characters. So they need to be someplace, and they might as well be in the same place as they are in the ASCII table. Best, - Joe -- Joe Strout -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
