- From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>
- Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1993 04:24:55 +0900 (JST)
- To: PRECAL@RULMVS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Johan van Wingen)
- Cc: ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM, wg-char@rare.nl
> (It is TWO octets, > NOT 16 bits.) What do you want to say? ISO 10646 codes do not have to be serialized as an octet stream. So, saying UNICODE 16 bits is quite correct. > This would NOT be a conforming implementation of 10646, such as would be > required in procurement specifications. Rules of procurements for the > European Governments are becoming very strict, and NO conformance will > mean NO orders. The proposals (both mine and Dan's) achieve strict conformance to ISO 10646. The problem of ISO 10646 (and many other ISO standards) is that the strict conformance means NO orders, which is slightly improved by the proposals. > If you want to stay in business in the future, you shoud base your > products on adopted standards, not on gossip or private hobbies. The proposals are based on adopted standards. Masataka Ohta --Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)
Received on Thursday, 4 November 1993 11:29:48 UTC