RetroSearch Browse

Wed Sep 15 20:56:34 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-September/048935.html

On Sep 14, 2004, at 23:03, Martin v. Löwis wrote:

> I think this is historically incorrect. ISO 10646 and Unicode were
> developed in lock-step, and the very first publication of ISO 10646
> (in 1993) had precisely the same character assignments as Unicode 1.1.
> Ever since then, both standards are roughly the same.

ISO is not known for its speed. You are probable right about 
publication date.
However I'm sure I had my draft iso 10646 a long time before the unicode
got going. But its all a long time ago, I'll not bet on it.

> ... assuming encodings are the only issue in creating international
> software.

Of course you are right its one part of the puzzle to allow a piece of
software to be acceptable in a particular culture.

Barry

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-September/048935.html below:

Unicode history (was Alternative Impl. for PEP 292)