Acquiring DIS 10646

[Sean Leonard]

On 10/3/2015 11:24 AM, Janusz S. Bien wrote:
> Quote/Cytat - Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org> (Sat 03 Oct 2015 08:00:12 
> PM CEST):
>
>> Sean Leonard wrote:
>>
>>> What I understand is that Draft 1 got shot down because it was at
>>> variance with the nascent Unicode effort;
>>
>> If I remember correctly, Draft 1 looked a lot like an updated and 
>> expanded version of ISO 2022, much more than it did like today's 
>> Unicode/10646.
>
> Rob Pike, Ken Thompson
> Hello World
>
> http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/utf.html
>
> The draft of ISO 10646 was not very attractive to us. It defined a 
> sparse set of 32-bit characters, which would be hard to implement and 
> have punitive storage requirements. Also, the draft attempted to 
> mollify national interests by allocating 16-bit subspaces to national 
> committees to partition individually. The suggested mode of use was to 
> ‘‘flip’’ between separate national standards to implement the 
> international standard.

Yes, that's the one.

Sean