Lists Home |
Date Index |
Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> No. 0x0085 is not AFAIK a character in ISO 8859-1 (it is one of the design principles
> of 8859-1 that it will not fail on systems that mask the 8th bit and look for control
In one sense that is correct. However, the character encoding scheme
labeled "ISO 8859-1" includes both the C0 and the C1 character sets.
Check the mapping tables at http://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/ISO8859 .
Not to perambulate || John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
the corridors || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
in the boots of ascension. \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel