RIP ISO 8859?
Thursday, 8 July 2004 12:46![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pneA recent edit to the en Wikipedia article on ISO 8859 added this bit:
The ISO/IEC 8859 standard was maintained by ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1, Subcommittee 2, Working Group 3 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 3). In June 2004, WG 3 disbanded, and maintenance duties were transferred to SC 2. The standard is not currently being updated, as the Subcommittee's only remaining Working Group, WG 2, is concentrating on development of ISO/IEC 10646.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: Thursday, 8 July 2004 07:33 (UTC)Unicode baby yeah!
no subject
Date: Thursday, 8 July 2004 08:23 (UTC)(Said world would also include widespread support for language-specific glyph shaping, for starters, so we wouldn't have the Romanian mess.)
no subject
Date: Thursday, 8 July 2004 09:40 (UTC)Not that I hate 8859-x per sè (I did a lot of work on the various ISO-8859-x articles (I wrote most of them except the main ones), but the main reason I dislike it is the ASCIIcentricism they still propagate: Á (a acute) is "normal", but n (n acute) is "weird"?
ASCIIcentrism
Date: Thursday, 8 July 2004 09:55 (UTC)ASCII treats 'a' and 'n' both the same (they're both there) and 'á' and 'ń' also both the same (they're both absent).
ISO-8859-1 has 'á' but not 'ń', while ISO-8859-2 has both. But I'm not sure why you think that's significant, since they serve different languages.