• From: Andrew Cassin <acassin@c...>
• To: abrahams@a...
• Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:47:48 +1000

On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, John Cowan wrote:
> Abstractly considered, Unicode builds on the 10646 core
> by adding many character properties; 10646 has only a few (diacritic
> vs. base is one).  Therefore, in order to import these properties it
> is necessary to use Unicode.

Putting it another way: Tony Graham in his book ``Unicode(tm): a 
Primer" (ISBN 0-7645-4625-2) states:

the Unicode Standard provides well-defined semantics for each character,
including numeric, spacing, combination and directionality properties. 
Several new property types were added to the Unicode Standard, Version 
3.0 ... The specification of these semantics is not currently included 
in ISO/IEC 10646 ...

This book is an excellent reference for Unicode well worth a read. The 
property assignments for Unicode are available from their FTP site 
(ftp.unicode.org).

Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with the author/publisher in any way.

-- 

Andrew Cassin
acassin@c...

• References:
  • Re: ISO 10646 vs. Unicode in XML specs
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why the Infoset?
• Next by Date: Re: Question About Namespaces and DTDs
• Previous by thread: Re: ISO 10646 vs. Unicode in XML specs
• Next by thread: ANN: PERL version of XML-DBMS
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread