🚀 go-pugleaf

Also sprach Dimitri Vulis, (dlv@cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu):
>Many folks (including myself) feel that 10646 is a bad DIS.
>
>There is, however, a 16-bit proposal known as Unicode. I'd like to
>see a Unix that handles 16-bit text well! :)

I don't know too much about either Unicode and 10646, but of
what I know 10646 seems to be the winner. Unicode seems to
be incompatible and insufficient. Also, Unicode is always
16-bit, whereas 10646 leaves room for 8-bit as well as
16- and 32-bit characters. Also, 10646 will have an ISO
stamp on it. Things like Unicode will only make a mess
of it. I want *one* standard, not two, on the risk of
having none in practice. If you think 10646 is in bad shape, 
object to it and try do to change it. It is still in draft.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
"There is only one success, namely to lead your life in your own way"
Anyone who can give a source for this?