- From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:09:23 +0900
- To: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
- Cc: ietf charsets <ietf-charsets@ISI.EDU>, Murata Makoto <murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp>
At 19:34 98/05/19 +0000, Misha Wolf wrote: > Makoto, > > In a recent mail you wrote: > > We now replace > > > > As long as the character repertoires and code point assignments of > > ISO 10646 and those of Unicode are in sync, and as far as they are > > not being reallocated, this charset refers to the latest version of > > Unicode/ISO 10646. > > > > with > > > > This charset refers to the same version of ISO/IEC 10646-1 and Unicode > > that the charset "UTF-8" refers to (See RFC 2279). > > I am not clear whether this latest proposal would still include the text: > > > [ISO-10646] ISO/IEC, Information Technology - Universal Multiple-Octet Coded > > Character Set (UCS) - Part 1: Architecture and Basic Multilingual Plane, > > May 1993, with amendments 1 through 7. > > > > [UNICODE] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard -- Version 2.0", > > Addison-Wesley, 1996. > > There are some problems with these references and I would suggest we use the > RFC 2279 references. Is that what you intend? Misha - While we do not need these references anymore for defining which character is at which codepoint (and how this gets updated), we still need references to ISO 10646 and Unicode for the definition of UTF-16 per se. So we cannot just throw out the above references. But we can point to the exact place of the UTF-16 definition. Regards, Martin. --Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 1998 20:11:34 UTC