I'm answering a few emails here, so forgive me :)
1. As for the TRON article comparing with an old version of Unicode, I
agree - I did point out in me earlier email that it was an article from
2001.
Curt Sampson wrote:
> The problem I have with that is, I don't think it does fall short of the
> ideal. For a general-purpose multi-lingual character set, I can't think
> of anything better than Unicode. I know of 's nothing else anywhere
> near as capable that offers such a good compromise of clear standards,
> ease of use, intertranslation with other character sets and reasonably
> compact character encodings.
>
>
I'm not an expert on character encodings, so I won't argue on this at all :)
> Unicode is one of the best technical successes I've ever seen in the
> computer industry. It does 99% of what people need 99% of the time. This
> is why I find the Japanese criticism of it so annoying.
>
>
2. It's not just Japanese criticism - given the article about Unicode
from the IBM site.
> cjs
>
That said, Sun and the Ubiquitous Networking Lab (UNL - the R&D HQ of
the T-Engine Project) worked together to produce a version of Java that
has a "TRON Code Profile" --> this can be used on the T-Engine for the
development of embedded systems.
As for the bias in the TRON articles, well, the site *is* called TRONWeb
:D - though there's no official affiliation between the TRON Project and
the site.
Cheers
Mohit.
Received on Wed Jan 11 07:15:22 2006