[r6rs-discuss] unicode (re comment #134)

From: Thomas Lord <lord>
Date: Mon Dec 18 01:16:05 2006

John Cowan wrote:
> Thomas Lord scripsit:
>
>
>> So what is your claim, here, John? That between 3.0 and 4.1
>> the consortium changed its mind about internal use of
>> surrogates *but forget to tell anyone*?
>>
>
> Is there some reason to cite a 7-year-old version of the Unicode
> Standard?

Yes, and I think I explained it pretty well.

-t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/attachments/20061217/d67c7a0d/attachment.htm
Received on Mon Dec 18 2006 - 01:19:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:00 UTC