Also the aliases for C1 controls were formally registered in 1983 only for
the two ranges U+0084..U+0097 and U+009B..U+009F for ISO 6429.
So the abbreviation (and names) aliases given to:
- U+0082 (BPH =BREAK PERMITTED HERE),
- U+0083 (NBH = NO BREAK HERE),
- U+0098 (SOS=START OF STRING) and
- U+0
2015-10-05 21:32 GMT+02:00 Ken Whistler :
>
> On 10/5/2015 8:24 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:
>
>> I too am puzzled as to what DIS 10646 and C1 control pictures have to do
>> with each other.
>>
>>
> What an *excellent* cue to start a riff on arcane Unicode history!
>
> First, let me explain what I think
On 10/5/2015 8:24 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:
I too am puzzled as to what DIS 10646 and C1 control pictures have to do
with each other.
What an *excellent* cue to start a riff on arcane Unicode history!
First, let me explain what I think Sean Leonard's concern here is.
1. On 10/4/2015 5:30 AM, Se
I too am puzzled as to what DIS 10646 and C1 control pictures have to do
with each other.
--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
On 10/4/2015 5:30 AM, Sean Leonard
wrote:
On
10/3/2015 12:28 PM, Asmus Freytag (t) wrote:
On 10/3/2015 8:15 AM, Sean Leonard wrote:
Thanks.
Well, "DIS 10646" is the Draft International Standard,
On 10/3/2015 12:28 PM, Asmus Freytag (t) wrote:
On 10/3/2015 8:15 AM, Sean Leonard wrote:
Thanks.
Well, "DIS 10646" is the Draft International Standard, particularly
Draft 1, from ~1990 or ~1991. (Sometimes it might have been called
10646.1.) Therefore it would likely only be in print form (o
On 10/3/2015 11:24 AM, Janusz S. Bien wrote:
Quote/Cytat - Doug Ewell (Sat 03 Oct 2015 08:00:12
PM CEST):
Sean Leonard wrote:
What I understand is that Draft 1 got shot down because it was at
variance with the nascent Unicode effort;
If I remember correctly, Draft 1 looked a lot like an u
On 10/3/2015 8:15 AM, Sean Leonard
wrote:
Thanks.
Well, "DIS 10646" is the Draft International Standard,
particularly Draft 1, from ~1990 or ~1991. (Sometimes it might
have been called 10646.1.) Therefore it would likely only be in
pri
Quote/Cytat - Doug Ewell (Sat 03 Oct 2015 08:00:12
PM CEST):
Sean Leonard wrote:
What I understand is that Draft 1 got shot down because it was at
variance with the nascent Unicode effort;
If I remember correctly, Draft 1 looked a lot like an updated and
expanded version of ISO 2022, mu
Sean Leonard wrote:
What I understand is that Draft 1 got shot down because it was at
variance with the nascent Unicode effort;
If I remember correctly, Draft 1 looked a lot like an updated and
expanded version of ISO 2022, much more than it did like today's
Unicode/10646.
--
Doug Ewell |
Thanks.
Well, "DIS 10646" is the Draft International Standard, particularly
Draft 1, from ~1990 or ~1991. (Sometimes it might have been called
10646.1.) Therefore it would likely only be in print form (or printed
and scanned form). It's pretty old. What I understand is that Draft 1
got shot d
references.
Michel
-Original Message-
From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Sean Leonard
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2015 9:47 PM
To: unicode@unicode.org
Subject: Acquiring DIS 10646
As part of yet more research, I would like to get a hold of DIS 10646, aka
Draft
As part of yet more research, I would like to get a hold of DIS 10646,
aka Draft International Standard ISO/IEC 10646.1 (circa 1990 or 1991).
I understand that Draft 2 (10646.2) was accepted and therefore became
ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993.
Therefore, I am looking for a copy (preferably free, prefer
13 matches
Mail list logo
