At 3:19 PM -0700 4/20/01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
At 03:50 PM 4/20/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say 0 and 1 are adequate. I find this discussion rather pointless
since we all already know that ASCII is adequate if the given premise
is that ASCII is adequate. I don't see what's there to
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 11:31:10AM -0500, Ayers, Mike wrote:
Errr - my point is:
"If you attempt to promote Unicode by saying that it now enables
adequate computing in English, you will not be well received."
What's yours?
Depends on who you're talking to and what you
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 11:31:10AM -0500, Ayers, Mike wrote:
Errr - my point is:
"If you attempt to promote Unicode by saying that it now enables
adequate computing in English, you will not be well received."
What's yours?
Depends on who you're talking to and what
Perhaps I should have gone with C, but the point was your
English-processing English-commented Perl programs are in ASCII. You
sent out an ASCII email. If you were (?) English
Heavens, no :-) Strictly speaking not even ISO 8859-1 would be enough
for Finnish, I think 8859-15 is the first
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:43:02PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heavens, no :-) Strictly speaking not even ISO 8859-1 would be enough
for Finnish, I think 8859-15 is the first set that covers all the required
characters. (But 8859-1 is enough for everyday use.)
all your files would
At 03:50 PM 4/20/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say 0 and 1 are adequate. I find this discussion rather pointless
since we all already know that ASCII is adequate if the given premise
is that ASCII is adequate. I don't see what's there to discuss.
We are just trying to see if tautologies
Also, you're part of the problem. "8859-1 is enough for everyday use."
Yes, and rather proud of it, in the same way as opposition is
the way to healthy democracy. Also, we are not the guilty ones,
we use what's given to us, I would say the guilty ones are the
"adequate" designers of the
7 matches
Mail list logo
