Talk:Unicode/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

IPA and Unicode

Hi, Unicode 5.0 is now out. Does anyone know if the IPA character for the labiodental flap () has been incorporated into the latest version of the Unicode standard? Thank you. --Kjoonlee 18:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It hans't been incorporated yet. SIL Corporate PUA Assignments say it's to be included in a later version, and Proposed New Characters: Pipeline Table mentions it's still in the pipeline. --Kjoonlee 16:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It's in Unicode 5.1.0 now. --Kjoonlee 09:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

email and japanese

i dont know if this is a unicode thing but when somebody sends me japanese characters i get stuff i cant read but if i send that email again to a system that uses that set it still translates it right(eg a mobile phone(jp version) would be good to add a link on the unicode page that leads to programs that translate these characters back to japanese and a webbased sollution too. 124.102.32.2 04:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It's probably written in a standard your system isn't set up to read properly. 惑乱 分からん 16:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Normalization?

The article mentions normalization, but it doesn't explain what normalization is in this context.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.85.157.177 (talk)

Ah, er, ... no, it doesn't. does it. And it should, shouldn't it.

I'll create a section on normalization in a few days, unless someone beats me to it. Cheers, CWC(talk) 17:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Weasel words Issues section?

Do some of the descriptions in the Issues section sound like weasel words to anyone else? Specifically, I mean the phrases like "Some Japanese computer programmers object to Unicode" and (especially) "Some have decried Unicode as a plot against Asian cultures perpetrated by Westerners..." I had added the weasel tag but it was quickly removed by someone and I was cited for vandalism - I swear, I'm not trying to mess around with anything. But that section definitely has quite a bit of "some X say" and "it is claimed that," etc.

I don't actually know anything about the debates surrounding those issues themselves (I was just browsing to learn about Unicode) so I don't know how those phrases should be corrected, but my impression is that one can add a tag there to signal for other people who might know better about how to clarify?

Yishan 03:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just edited that section to add some references, which might be helpful. There was some opposition to Unicode 5-10 years ago, mostly from Japan, but not much was written about it in English. Those statements ("Some Japanese computer programmers object to Unicode", "Some have decried Unicode as a plot against Asian cultures perpetrated by Westerners...") are a bit 'weaselly', but they're also perfectly accurate as far as I know, and they're probably the best we can do with English-language sources. I hope this helps, CWC 09:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Were not some of the Tron links very explicitly against Unicode from a Japanese perspective? If someone wants to unweasel the text, I think some of the links at Han_unification may help. Mlewan 11:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggest merge

I suggested to merge Unicode roadmap into this article. Anyone oppose? --✉ Hello World! 09:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• Looks like a good move to me. CWC 18:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Missing history

Unicode began with the opposition to ISO 10646 and later two party finally reached a consensus and merge into one. Do anyone know about that history? — HenryLi (Talk) 18:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a little at ISO 10646#History of ISO 10646. EdC (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

That section is short but very informative. Thanks, EdC. CWC 09:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Clarification Needed: Code Value vs. Code Point -

From the page on Aug 27th, 2007:

In UTF-32 and UCS-4, one 32-bit code value serves as a fairly direct representation of any character's code point [...]. In the other cases, each code point may be represented by a variable number of code values.

Could someone please clarify the distinction between a "code value" and a "code point"? Searching in the text does not clarify the difference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.248.80 (talk) 05:54, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

I've added the following:

An encoding maps (possibly a subset of) the range of Unicode code points to sequences of values in some fixed-size range, termed code values.

EdC 12:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

One-to-one

According to one-to-one, one-to-one means injective, which can be done between sets of different sizes. It is a bit ambiguous; I learned it as bijective. It shouldn't just be deleted, but I don't know that injective is clear enough to enough of our readers to be the right word to use here.--Prosfilaes 21:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Question on carriage returns / line feeds

Would some knowledgeable person be willing to comment on whether Unicode resolves the carriage return problem that exists between computer platforms (Apple, PC, Unix)? It was my understanding that Unicode allows a text file to be properly read on all platforms, but I don't know how this works. If Unicode does not resolve this problem, it would be helpful to state this explicitly and refer to the reader to another article that addresses this issue. Regards, WWriter (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

A text file can be read on any platform, if the user has a program that handles any kind of carriage return. But no, the different standards still prevail. Besides there is a big difference between different text files. A program that reads UTF8 may not be able to read UTF16, and so on. However, that confusion is not as much cross platform as within each platform.

Is it really necessary to mention that in this article? There is some info at Newline#Unicode. One could have a reference to it, I guess, but from which section? Mlewan (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Unicode does not resolve this issue any more than any other ASCII-based character set does. --JWB (talk) 21:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Unicode would have made the CR/NL problem even more complicated by adding U+2028 LINE SEPARATOR and U+2029 PARAGRAPH SEPARATOR; however, nobody is using these two characters. — Monedula (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

What on earth are LINE SEPARATOR and PARAGRAPH SEPARATOR supposed to do? Are they supposed to draw horizontal lines across the screen, from the start of the left edge of the current window, to the right edge of the current window? Until now, I had never even heard of LINE SEPARATOR or PARAGRAPH SEPARATOR. If that is the effect, I can see how useful they would be in directory listings. On the other hand, maybe they let you use different colors from one passage of text to the next, as in PETASCII, something I have been unable to implement in my Mac. You can't imagine how disappointed I am. Can you explain the concept of separation as you see it? 216.99.201.190 (talk) 19:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

It has been a while since this question was posed, but I think the responses do not really directly respond to the question. First, it is important to understand that before Unicode, different OSs and platforms often relied on their own character encodings (apparently finding the ISO standard encodings/character sets inadequate). So independent of the new line issue, Unicode does (to the extent that it is being adopted) supersede all of these other character set / encodings and therefore provides a solution of allowing text files to be read on any platform.

In terms of the new line, Unicode did introduce U+2028 LINE SEPARATOR and U+2029 PARAGRAPH SEPARATOR as Monedula mentioned. This however was an attempt to provide a Unicode solution to semantically encoding paragraphs and lines: potentially replacing all of the various platform solutions. So in doing so, Unicode does provide a way around the historical platform dependent solutions. However, as Monedula also revealed, few if any Unicode solutions have adopted these Unicode line and paragraph separators as the sole canonical line ending characters. However, a common approach to solving this issue is through new line normalization. This is done with the Cocoa text system in Mac OS X and also with W3C XML and HTML recommendations. In this approach every possible new line character is internally converted to a common new line (which one doesn't really matter since its an internal operation just for rendering). So in other words, regardless of how the line ending is encoded in the text, the text system can treat it as a new line. I hope that clarifies things a bit. Indexheavy (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I tried to add a concise section on this issue, with a reference to the Newline#Unicode section. Hope this helps. WWriter (talk) 05:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

The upshot is that adding new codepoints in addition to carrage return and newline breaks previously-working code. Asserting that these new codepoints supercede the old ones doesn't magicly fix things. Quanstro (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no newline code point. In pre-Unicode systems, there's CR, LF, and NEL (next line), with CR+LF another standard. (Unicode also lists FF as a new line marker, and adds LS (line separator) and PS (paragraph separator).) Any system that handled all four would have had to change to support UTF-8 and/or UTF-16, and if you didn't already support all four, who cares if they added a fifth you could ignore?--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Clarification section

Somewhere, very early in the article, the following terms must be explained:

• Rows,
• Blocks,
• Planes;

and their interrelationships. I presume glyph and character comes that early, but I've not looked. Said: Rursus ☻ 09:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The article is not very clear on many key concepts, and needs some attention. I have added a new section on Architecture and Terminology near the beginning which addresses this issue--I hope that it is not too much detail.BabelStone (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that's a big improvement. I've long felt this artilce presented a largely skewed view of Uniocde: focussing too much on the Unicode transformation formats and other peripheral issues and not enough on the central topic of the assignement of characters to code point, collation and other algorithms, etc. Your new section goes a long way toward imporving that. Indexheavy (talk) 23:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Image of the book restored

I undid an edit with the edit message remove fair use image from unicode. That is an image of a *book* which while its about unicode, does not partain to the article and adds nothing to the article.. This book isn't about unicode, this book is Unicode; the formal definition of "the Unicode Standard version 5.0" is "what's published in this book". --Alvestrand (talk) 05:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah drat, did not see this comment, see mine below ;). —— nixeagle 20:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

fair use image

Noted a few things in my comment on removal of the image. That image fails to provide a fair use rational as required by our non free image policy. As part of that it need to be spoken about in the article, not used as a pretty picture. If the book is actually spoken about that at least gives a case to leaving the image in. This is unicode: http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.1.0/. The book is actually out of date by a version. Do we still wish to include non-free content? Better images to include would be examples of what unicode looks like. Those can be free. —— nixeagle 20:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The book is spoken about in the article as it IS the latest published version of the Unicode Standard. It is not out of data by a version as the book is only published when there is a major update to the standard (i.e. version 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0). Unicode 5.1 is a minor update, and so there is no new book associated with it. If you go to http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.1.0/ you will see that the pdf files linked to on the left are those for version 5.0, i.e. the 5.0 book. Quoting from that page: "Version 5.1.0 of the Unicode Standard consists of the book publication (The Unicode Standard, Version 5.0), as amended by this specification, together with the 5.1.0 Unicode Standard Annexes and the 5.1.0 Unicode Character Database (UCD)." The image should be reinstated.BabelStone (talk) 21:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The lack of a non-free-use rationale was easily rectified; I'm not surprised that Everson didn't have the patience to figure out how to navigate the labyritnth of Wikipedia's required justifications. FWIW, the Unicode standard is NOT based on RFCs. RFCs are IETF publications, the Unicode standard is created by the Unicode consortium. --Alvestrand (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

UCS vs UTF

What's the difference between the two? This should be mentioned, as I don't know and would like to know. :P --Snaxe/fow (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree the article could be clearer on this, but I've been unsure how to clear it up in a thorough way. The UCS is the Universal Character Set which the Unicode Consortium and the ISO cooperate to maintain and basically permanently assigns a character (semantic graphemes) to specific codepoint in a 32 bit range of codepoints. Unicode only supports fewer than 21 bits of those codepoints but that seems likely to handle the needs of computers for some time to come. There may be some agreement from ISO to not use the other bits, but I'm not sure. I think in terms of UCS-4 that is the ISO character encoding that addresses all 32bits of the range, the remaining codepoints not supported by Unicode are reserved for private use.

From the UCS the Unicode consortium adds many other algorithms and property lists that support text processing on computer systems. These include the UTF (Unicode Transform Formats) that allow the more than one million code points supported by Unicode to be expressed in a stream of bytes (variable length for UTF-16, UTF-8, etc.; and fixed length for UTF-32 or what some have proposed a UTF-24). However, the UCS and the UTFs are only two of the building blocks of Unicode text processing. There are also collation algorithms, the bidirectional text algorithm, character folding algorithms (treating characters as equivalent for the purposes of searching and collating), glyph shaping algorithms, etc. Together with the UCS all of these algorithms and character properties comprise the Unicode standard. Hope that helps. Indexheavy (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The last sentence of the opening paragraph states "the now-obsolete UCS-2 (which uses 2 bytes for all characters, but does not include every character in the Unicode standard), and UTF-16 (which extends UCS-2, using 4 bytes to encode characters missing from UCS-2)." If you want more information you only have to look at the "Unicode" box at the right underneath the book picture, and click on the appropriate link, and that will explain the difference between e.g. UCS-2 and UTF-16. BabelStone (talk) 12:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Unicode and other Standards

Since Unicode character encoding is now an important part of (and sometimes a requirement of) many other IT and communications standards including XHTML, and ISO/IEC 14651 etc. I think it might be very useful to have a section detailing this. Does anyone have a comprehensive list of other standards and protocols using Unicode ~ ISO/IEC 10646? Chris Fynn (talk) 19:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a list but I put a link relevant to HTML on the Unicode equivalence page because one of the notions of equivalence impinges on layout matters. There's a document for XML as well, google can find it. VasileGaburici (talk) 00:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Chris, it would be a huge job to build, and then keep up to date, a list of standards that reference ISO/IEC 10646 or Unicode; but searching the ISO store I find that the following 118 current standards mention "ISO/IEC 10646" in their text, although you would have to go through them all individually to check whether they formally reference 10646 or not. There are of course many other non-ISO standards that reference 10646 or Unicode, for example a lot of defence and aeronautical standards reference 10646 as the source for the "Basic Character Set" (BCS) that they use ... a subset of the 10646 character set comprising the first 128 characters only. BabelStone (talk) 12:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• IEC 81714-2:2006 = Design of graphical symbols for use in the technical documentation of products -- Part 2: Specification for graphical symbols in a computer sensible form, including graphical symbols for a reference library, and requirements for their interchange
• ISO 843:1997 = Information and documentation -- Conversion of Greek characters into Latin characters
• ISO 1951:2007 = Presentation/representation of entries in dictionaries -- Requirements, recommendations and information
• ISO 2709:2008 = Information and documentation -- Format for information exchange
• ISO 3166-1:2006 = Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions -- Part 1: Country codes
• ISO 3166-2:2007 = Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions -- Part 2: Country subdivision code
• ISO 8459-5:2002 = Information and documentation -- Bibliographic data element directory -- Part 5: Data elements for the exchange of cataloguing and metadata
• ISO 10303-11:2004 = Industrial automation systems and integration -- Product data representation and exchange -- Part 11: Description methods: The EXPRESS language reference manual
• ISO 12006-3:2007 = Building construction -- Organization of information about construction works -- Part 3: Framework for object-oriented information
• ISO 13374-2:2007 = Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines -- Data processing, communication and presentation -- Part 2: Data processing
• ISO 13399-1:2006 = Cutting tool data representation and exchange -- Part 1: Overview, fundamental principles and general information model
• ISO 13584-26:2000/Amd 1:2007 =
• ISO 15706-2:2007 = Information and documentation -- International Standard Audiovisual Number (ISAN) -- Part 2: Version identifier
• ISO 15740:2008 = Photography -- Electronic still picture imaging -- Picture transfer protocol (PTP) for digital still photography devices
• ISO 15745-1:2003 = Industrial automation systems and integration -- Open systems application integration framework -- Part 1: Generic reference description
• ISO 15745-1:2003/Amd 1:2007 =
• ISO 15745-3:2003 = Industrial automation systems and integration -- Open systems application integration framework -- Part 3: Reference description for IEC 61158-based control systems
• ISO 15924:2004 = Information and documentation -- Codes for the representation of names of scripts
• ISO 15930-7:2008 = Graphic technology -- Prepress digital data exchange using PDF -- Part 7: Complete exchange of printing data (PDF/X-4) and partial exchange of printing data with external profile reference (PDF/X-4p) using PDF 1.6
• ISO 16484-5:2007 = Building automation and control systems -- Part 5: Data communication protocol
• ISO 19118:2005 = Geographic information -- Encoding
• ISO 21549-5:2008 = Health informatics -- Patient healthcard data -- Part 5: Identification data
• ISO 21549-6:2008 = Health informatics -- Patient healthcard data -- Part 6: Administrative data
• ISO 24517-1:2008 = Document management -- Engineering document format using PDF -- Part 1: Use of PDF 1.6 (PDF/E-1)
• ISO 81714-1:1999 = Design of graphical symbols for use in the technical documentation of products -- Part 1: Basic rules
• ISO/IEC 1539-1:2004 = Information technology -- Programming languages -- Fortran -- Part 1: Base language
• ISO/IEC 2022:1994 = Information technology -- Character code structure and extension techniques
• ISO/IEC 2375:2003 = Information technology -- Procedure for registration of escape sequences and coded character sets
• ISO/IEC 5218:2004 = Information technology -- Codes for the representation of human sexes
• ISO/IEC 6429:1992 = Information technology -- Control functions for coded character sets
• ISO/IEC 6937:2001 = Information technology -- Coded graphic character set for text communication -- Latin alphabet
• ISO/IEC 8211:1994 = Information technology -- Specification for a data descriptive file for information interchange
• ISO/IEC 8652:1995/Amd 1:2007 =
• ISO/IEC 8859-1:1998 = Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1
• ISO/IEC 8859-4:1998 = Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 4: Latin alphabet No. 4
• ISO/IEC 8859-10:1998 = Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 10: Latin alphabet No. 6
• ISO/IEC 9579:2000 = Information technology -- Remote database access for SQL with security enhancement
• ISO/IEC 9594-5:2005 = Information technology -- Open Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Protocol specifications
• ISO/IEC 9594-6:2005 = Information technology -- Open Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Selected attribute types
• ISO/IEC 9646-3:1998 = Information technology -- Open Systems Interconnection -- Conformance testing methodology and framework -- Part 3: The Tree and Tabular Combined Notation (TTCN)
• ISO/IEC 9834-8:2005 = Information technology -- Open Systems Interconnection -- Procedures for the operation of OSI Registration Authorities: Generation and registration of Universally Unique Identifiers (UUIDs) and their use as ASN.1 Object Identifier components
• ISO/IEC 9899:1999 = Programming languages -- C
• ISO/IEC 9899:1999/Cor 2:2004 =
• ISO/IEC 9995-2:2002 = Information technology -- Keyboard layouts for text and office systems -- Part 2: Alphanumeric section
• ISO/IEC 10175-2:1996 = Information technology -- Text and office systems -- Document Printing Application (DPA) -- Part 2: Protocol specification
• ISO/IEC 10918-3:1997 = Information technology -- Digital compression and coding of continuous-tone still images: Extensions
• ISO/IEC 11160-1:1996 = Information technology -- Office equipment -- Minimum information to be included in specification sheets -- Printers -- Part 1: Class 1 and Class 2 printers
• ISO/IEC 11179-1:2004 = Information technology -- Metadata registries (MDR) -- Part 1: Framework
• ISO/IEC 11404:2007 = Information technology -- General-Purpose Datatypes (GPD)
• ISO/IEC 12087-5:1998 = Information technology -- Computer graphics and image processing -- Image Processing and Interchange (IPI) -- Functional specification -- Part 5: Basic Image Interchange Format (BIIF)
• ISO/IEC 12087-5:1998/Cor 1:2001 =
• ISO/IEC 13238-3:1998 = Information technology -- Data Management -- Part 3: IRDS export/import facility
• ISO/IEC 13346-1:1995 = Information technology -- Volume and file structure of write-once and rewritable media using non-sequential recording for information interchange -- Part 1: General
• ISO/IEC 13490-1:1995 = Information technology -- Volume and file structure of read-only and write-once compact disk media for information interchange -- Part 1: General
• ISO/IEC 13522-6:1998 = Information technology -- Coding of multimedia and hypermedia information -- Part 6: Support for enhanced interactive applications
• ISO/IEC 13568:2002 = Information technology -- Z formal specification notation -- Syntax, type system and semantics
• ISO/IEC 13886:1996 = Information technology -- Language-Independent Procedure Calling (LIPC)
• ISO/IEC 14496-22:2007 = Information technology -- Coding of audio-visual objects -- Part 22: Open Font Format
• ISO/IEC 14496-4:2004 = Information technology -- Coding of audio-visual objects -- Part 4: Conformance testing
• ISO/IEC 14568:1997 = Information technology -- DXL: Diagram eXchange Language for tree-structured charts
• ISO/IEC 14651:2007 = Information technology -- International string ordering and comparison -- Method for comparing character strings and description of the common template tailorable ordering
• ISO/IEC 14755:1997 = Information technology -- Input methods to enter characters from the repertoire of ISO/IEC 10646 with a keyboard or other input device
• ISO/IEC 14772-1:1997 = Information technology -- Computer graphics and image processing -- The Virtual Reality Modeling Language -- Part 1: Functional specification and UTF-8 encoding
• ISO/IEC 14863:1996 = Information technology -- System-Independent Data Format (SIDF)
• ISO/IEC 14882:2003 = Programming languages -- C++
• ISO/IEC 15417:2007 = Information technology -- Automatic identification and data capture techniques -- Code 128 bar code symbology specification
• ISO/IEC 15897:1999 = Information technology -- Procedures for registration of cultural elements
• ISO/IEC 15938-5:2003 = Information technology -- Multimedia content description interface -- Part 5: Multimedia description schemes
• ISO/IEC 15961:2004 = Information technology -- Radio frequency identification (RFID) for item management -- Data protocol: application interface
• ISO/IEC 15962:2004 = Information technology -- Radio frequency identification (RFID) for item management -- Data protocol: data encoding rules and logical memory functions
• ISO/IEC 17592:2004 = Information technology -- 120 mm (4,7 Gbytes per side) and 80 mm (1,46 Gbytes per side) DVD rewritable disk (DVD-RAM)
• ISO/IEC 19503:2005 = Information technology -- XML Metadata Interchange (XMI)
• ISO/IEC 19778-1:2008 = Information technology -- Learning, education and training -- Collaborative technology -- Collaborative workplace -- Part 1: Collaborative workplace data model
• ISO/IEC 19778-2:2008 = Information technology -- Learning, education and training -- Collaborative technology -- Collaborative workplace -- Part 2: Collaborative environment data model
• ISO/IEC 19778-3:2008 = Information technology -- Learning, education and training -- Collaborative technology -- Collaborative workplace -- Part 3: Collaborative group data model
• ISO/IEC 19780-1:2008 = Information technology -- Learning, education and training -- Collaborative technology -- Collaborative learning communication -- Part 1: Text-based communication
• ISO/IEC 19784-1:2006 = Information technology -- Biometric application programming interface -- Part 1: BioAPI specification
• ISO/IEC 19784-1:2006/Amd 1:2007 = BioGUI specification
• ISO/IEC 19785-1:2006 = Information technology -- Common Biometric Exchange Formats Framework -- Part 1: Data element specification
• ISO/IEC 19785-3:2007 = Information technology -- Common Biometric Exchange Formats Framework -- Part 3: Patron format specifications
• ISO/IEC 21000-17:2006 = Information technology -- Multimedia framework (MPEG-21) -- Part 17: Fragment Identification of MPEG Resources
• ISO/IEC 22537:2006 = Information technology -- ECMAScript for XML (E4X) specification
• ISO/IEC 23001-1:2006 = Information technology -- MPEG systems technologies -- Part 1: Binary MPEG format for XML
• ISO/IEC 23270:2006 = Information technology -- Programming languages -- C#
• ISO/IEC 23271:2006 = Information technology -- Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) Partitions I to VI
• ISO/IEC 23651:2003 = Information technology -- 8 mm wide magnetic tape cartridge for information interchange -- Helical scan recording -- AIT-3 format
• ISO/IEC 24707:2007 = Information technology -- Common Logic (CL): a framework for a family of logic-based languages
• ISO/IEC 24709-1:2007 = Information technology -- Conformance testing for the biometric application programming interface (BioAPI) -- Part 1: Methods and procedures
• ISO/IEC 24738:2006 = Information technology -- Icon symbols and functions for multimedia link attributes
• ISO/IEC 24752-1:2008 = Information technology -- User interfaces -- Universal remote console -- Part 1: Framework
• ISO/IEC 24752-2:2008 = Information technology -- User interfaces -- Universal remote console -- Part 2: User interface socket description
• ISO/IEC 24752-3:2008 = Information technology -- User interfaces -- Universal remote console -- Part 3: Presentation template
• ISO/IEC 24752-5:2008 = Information technology -- User interfaces -- Universal remote console -- Part 5: Resource description
• ISO/IEC 24754:2008 = Information technology -- Document description and processing languages -- Minimum requirements for specifying document rendering systems
• ISO/IEC 24824-1:2007 = Information technology -- Generic applications of ASN.1: Fast infoset
• ISO/IEC 24824-3:2008 = Information technology -- Generic applications of ASN.1: Fast infoset security
• ISO/IEC 26907:2007 = Information technology -- Telecommunications and information exchange between systems -- High Rate Ultra Wideband PHY and MAC Standard
• ISO/IEC ISP 10611-1:2003 = Information technology -- International Standardized Profiles AMH1n -- Message Handling Systems -- Common Messaging -- Part 1: MHS Service Support
• ISO/IEC ISP 11186-1:1996 = Information technology -- International Standardized Profiles FVT3nn -- Virtual Terminal Basic Class -- Register of attribute assignment type definitions -- Part 1: FVT321 -- Font Assignment Type No. 1
• ISO/IEC ISP 11186-2:1996 = Information technology -- International Standardized Profiles FVT3nn -- Virtual Terminal Basic Class -- Register of attribute assignment type definitions -- Part 2: FVT311 -- Repertoire Assignment Type for ISO/IEC 10646
• ISO/IEC ISP 11186-3:2000 = Information technology -- International Standardized Profiles FVT3nn -- Virtual Terminal Basic Class -- Register of attribute assignment type definitions -- Part 3: FVT312 -- Repertoire Assignment Type for ISO/IEC 2022 Level 2
• ISO/IEC TR 10000-2:1998 = Information technology -- Framework and taxonomy of International Standardized Profiles -- Part 2: Principles and Taxonomy for OSI Profiles
• ISO/IEC TR 10176:2003 = Information technology -- Guidelines for the preparation of programming language standards
• ISO/IEC TR 11017:1998 = Information technology -- Framework for internationalization
• ISO/IEC TR 15285:1998 = Information technology -- An operational model for characters and glyphs
• ISO/IEC TR 15440:2005 = Information technology -- Future keyboards and other associated input devices and related entry methods
• ISO/IEC TR 19764:2005 = Information technology -- Guidelines, methodology and reference criteria for cultural and linguistic adaptability in information technology products
• ISO/IEC TR 19766:2007 = Information technology -- Guidelines for the design of icons and symbols accessible to all users, including the elderly and persons with disabilities
• ISO/IEC TR 19769:2004 = Information technology -- Programming languages, their environments and system software inferfaces -- Extensions for the programming language C to support new character data types
• ISO/IEC TR 24731-1:2007 = Information technology -- Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces -- Extensions to the C library -- Part 1: Bounds-checking interfaces
• ISO/IEEE 11073-10201:2004 = Health informatics -- Point-of-care medical device communication -- Part 10201: Domain information model
• ISO/TR 10303-12:1997 = Industrial automation systems and integration -- Product data representation and exchange -- Part 12: Description methods: The EXPRESS-I language reference manual
• ISO/TS 11073-92001:2007 = Health informatics -- Medical waveform format -- Part 92001: Encoding rules
• ISO/TS 18234-2:2006 = Traffic and Travel Information (TTI) -- TTI via Transport Protocol Expert Group (TPEG) data-streams -- Part 2: Syntax, Semantics and Framing Structure (SSF)
• ISO/TS 19103:2005 = Geographic information -- Conceptual schema language
• ISO/TS 19139:2007 = Geographic information -- Metadata -- XML schema implementation
• ISO/TS 24534-4:2008 = Automatic vehicle and equipment identification -- Electronic Registration Identification (ERI) for vehicles -- Part 4: Secure communications using asymmetrical techniques
• ISO/TS 24534-5:2008 = Automatic vehicle and equipment identification -- Electronic Registration Identification (ERI) for vehicles -- Part 5: Secure communications using symmetrical techniques

Unicode and Typography

Since Unicode encodes characters not glyphs (letter forms) I'm wodering if this article actually properly belongs in the Typography category? Strictly speaking Typography (unlike Unicode) is mainly to do with glyphs not characters. Chris Fynn (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a fine point to decide whether character encoding is close enough to typography to include the category. The latter integrally depends on the former, because, at the risk of oversimplifying the issue, choosing glyphs is also choosing characters. Because the advent of Unicode specifically has had a direct and sweeping impact on the practice of typography, I would suggest to leave it. —Michael Z. 2008-09-07 19:45 z

Unicode really encodes glyphs that "different enough" from each other or have different enough meanings (see the math alphabets above BMP for as example of the latter). OpenType fonts are addressed using Unicode code points etc., so Unicode is intimately related to typography anyway. Also Unicode itself contains some typographic features, like some standard ligatures, subscripts and superscripts etc. Parenthetically, new ligatures won't be added to Unicode since the decision to include them in Unicode was seen as "cheap" way to get superior typography in days when other solutions didn't exist. VasileGaburici (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I would also add that Unicode encodes graphemes which are basically assigning all of the potential glyphs that share an identical semantic / meaning to the same character. To provide contrast, Unicode could encode characters that are not graphemes (semantic phonemes or semantic concepts such as the mathematical constant π, for example), but it does not do that: instead focussing only on graphemes (compatibility characters aside). So even if we exclude all of the compatibility characters from Unicode (which are included even though they don't normally meet the cut), Unicode is still very much a part of typography since it is encoding graphemes.

Unicode also provides information on diacritic and combining mark placement. Though none of the Unicode implementations I am aware of make use of this information (relying instead on the font to do this work), the data is available from Unicode alone (without also requiring font support for combining marks). Indexheavy (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)