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
ISO never keeps previous versions of standards. You can look into the wg2 web
site at dkuug.dk that will give you some versions of these documents (Google or
your favorite search engine will be your friend) although all that may
disappear any day. If you tell me what you are looking for I can he
12 matches
Mail list logo
