Re: Unicode progress Sat, 23 October 1993 19:06 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03005; 23 Oct 93 15:06 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa02997; 23 Oct 93 15:06 EDT
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13960; 23 Oct 93 15:06 EDT
Received: by (4.1/UCD2.05) id AA24825; Sat, 23 Oct 93 11:53:11 PDT
Received: from by (4.1/UCD2.05) id AA24562; Sat, 23 Oct 93 11:42:11 PDT
Received: from by (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12431; Sat, 23 Oct 93 11:40:30 PDT
Message-Id: <>
To: Masataka Ohta <>
Cc: Dan Kegel <>,,
Subject: Re: Unicode progress
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 21 Oct 93 13:38:41 +0200." <>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 93 11:40:29 MDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US

you write
>That problem of Unicode is technical, not political.
>Just as characters in Greek and English are different, characters in
>Japanese and Chinese are different and should be assigned different
>code points, if we need to use Unicode without furthur specification.

It seems to me that English and Greek characters need separate code points
because their visual appearance is significantly different, not because
they are from different languages.
Do characters from different languages that have identical appearances
need separate code-points?  If so, why?  For sorting purposes?  For
equality comparison?
- Dan Kegel (