- From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1993 23:55:08 +0900 (JST)
- To: conklin@educom.edu (Jim Conklin)
- Cc: ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM
According to the ucs-bof discussion in the last IETF, I have dropped ietf-822 from Cc:. > >So, please don't say "international" when what you mean is merely > >"intereuropean". > > I think it's terribly important that we keep this in mind as we develop > standards for the future, and design, insofar as it's possible to doso, for > the long-range goal of a truly international -- not just intereuropean -- > network, though it will probably be necessary to miss that goal for > pragmatic, interim solutions for a while, just to keep moving on some of > the issues for which there are no clear solutions. It was agreed in the BOF that the number of transition effort to the future truely universal multilingual encoding should be minimized. Thus, if you assign very compact representations to European characters only, it will be so forever, which is not fare. Please don't say interim solutions if it is only a Eurocentric solution. We, people in Asia, just as Europeans, already have our way to electrically encode our characters. How can you say such currently available encoding can not be considered in the "interim" solutions? BTW, to eliminate the transition from ASCII, which is quite painful, some UTF is the must. > I must confess that I like Rick Troth's idea in this context, though I > certainly don't understand its practical implications yet: Fortunately enough, I have a idea on UTF2 compatible encoding, with which, extra 8256 two octet representation is available for frequently used non-European characters. MO --Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)
Received on Saturday, 17 July 1993 07:58:51 UTC