Re: For review: Migrating to Unicode

Frank Ellermann scripsit:

> That's odd, isn't it ?  When I use iso-8859-1 as Content-Type I
> certainly want more than only the minimal C0 set with ESC.  I'm
> going to use CR and LF (and maybe HT, FF, and others) without
> explicitly invoking a "non-minimal" C0 set.  

The C0 character set of ISO 646 is so entrenched that it does not even
have its own unique name, and even nigglers like me wind up speaking as if
US-ASCII had 128 rather than 95 characters.  Although many of its members
have lost their purpose (Synchronous Idle, anyone?)  and others were
misunderstood from the first (otherwise we'd be typing ^W and not ^D or
^Z to signal an end of file from the keyboard), it is still preeminently
*the* C0 set, de facto part of every 2022-compatible encoding.  Only a
few alternative C0 sets are significantly different from it, and those
are used only for highly specialized purposes.

-- 
A rose by any other name                            John Cowan
may smell as sweet,                                 http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
but if you called it an onion                       cowan@ccil.org
you'd get cooks very confused.          --RMS

Received on Saturday, 22 March 2008 19:52:26 UTC