Tim Bray wrote:
So, you gave up on technical points. OK.
Which is to say, for the benefit of those who have not had to
internalize the complicated world of standardization and
internationalization: Mr. Ohta's point of view represents the position
of a tiny minority; huge swathes of widely-deployed standards and
technology rely totally on 10646/Unicode, and they tend to work well,
and they tend to deliver high-quality experiences to their users,
including Japanese users. -Tim
I know. Read RFC1815. I wrote it to demonstrate Unicode usable for
some local purpose, though it is unrelated to internationalization.
As a random collection of local characters, Unicode, in theory, works
in any such local environment including Japanese one.
However, people with established existing local schemes, including
Japanese, keep using them, because Unicode is no better and the
existing local schemes are more efficient.
There is no point to some form of local version of Unicode, as we
must specify which local version we are using. RFC1815 gives
examples of such local versions.
Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf