Unicode progress

Chris Weider <clw@merit.edu> Mon, 18 October 1993 17:34 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07587; 18 Oct 93 13:34 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07581; 18 Oct 93 13:34 EDT
Received: from ucdavis.ucdavis.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09924; 18 Oct 93 13:34 EDT
Received: by ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (4.1/UCD2.05) id AA05806; Mon, 18 Oct 93 09:48:43 PDT
X-Orig-Sender: ietf-wnils-request@ucdavis.edu
Received: from merit.edu by ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (4.1/UCD2.05) id AA04861; Mon, 18 Oct 93 09:34:39 PDT
Return-Path: <clw@merit.edu>
Received: by merit.edu (5.65/1123-1.0) id AA26396; Mon, 18 Oct 93 12:36:57 -0400
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 12:36:57 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Chris Weider <clw@merit.edu>
Message-Id: <9310181636.AA26396@merit.edu>
To: dank@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Unicode progress
Cc: clw@merit.edu, ietf-wnils@ucdavis.edu

  It certainly sounds like some major industry players are backing this, and
it sounds like they might have the muscle to mandate this. One concern I have
is that we have some practical experience with this before it gets widely
deployed... Could you send me (or even better, post to the WNILS list) the
papers for the Plan 9 use of Unicode? In addition, I seem to remember some
problems with Japanese / Chinese arguments over characters that look the same
but needed to have different encodings for political reasons... Has that been
settled? In addition, this is a problem we're facing in a lot of places; in
the URN discussions, the data element discussions, etc. With your permission,
I'd like to forward your messages to those lists as well.
Chris Weider