RE: Windows 1252 Mapping Tables (was: Servlet question

Windows round trips undefined 125x characters in the range 0x80 - 0x9F by leaving their values unchanged. So in 1252, the undefined codepoint 0x81 maps to 0x81 and back. On the other hand, 0x80 is defined to be the EURO in 1252, so it maps to the corresponding Unicode value 0x20AC.

Murray

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Merle Tenney [SMTP:Merle.Tenney@corp.palm.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:13 PM
> To:	'Yves Arrouye'; 'Shigemichi Yazawa'; unicore@unicode.org; www-international@w3.org
> Subject:	Windows 1252 Mapping Tables  (was: Servlet question
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am cross-posting this on both www-international@w3.org and
> unicore@unicode.org, though the question is actually aimed more at the
> unicorrigibles.
> 
> Per the thread that follows, the Unicode mapping tables for Windows 1252
> don't square totally with the codepoint coverage in Windows 1252, as seen in
> Windows 2000.  Can someone who is close to this issue answer whether this
> is, in fact, the case?  If it is, are there any plans to square the Unicode
> mapping tables with the current Windows 1252 code page?
> 
> Merle
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yves Arrouye [mailto:yves@realnames.com]
> > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:19 PM
> > To: 'Shigemichi Yazawa'
> > Cc: www-international@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Servlet question
> > 
> > 
> > > > I thought that was the case, and windows-1252 was the
> > > > one that used C1 for platform-specific character (see
> > > >
> http://www-124.ibm.com/cvs/icu/charset/data/xml/windows-1252-2000.xml?rev=1.
> > > > 1&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup where apparently 
> > U+0081 is mapped to
> > > > 0x81 in windows-1252).
> > > 
> > > Is it data for ICU4C? Interesting that it doesn't agree 
> > with the table
> > > by unicode.org (see
> > > 
> > http://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/VENDORS/MICSFT/WINDOWS/CP1252.TXT).
> 
> It is what a tool run on Windows 2000 really saw in windows-1252 as opposed
> to a published table.
> 
> YA
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2001 15:38:38 UTC