Talk:ISO/IEC 646

ISO 646 should be ISO/IEC 646; similarly for 8859 and 10646. Presumably page names can't include a slash; is there some convention for representing this? In any case, since it's a global change affecting links I'll leave it for someone with a robot to do... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.49.53 (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Could someone add the dates when ISO 646 and ISO 8859 became popular? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.114.67 (talk) 15:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

During the 1960s, there was debate regarding whether character encoding standards [...] for computers should follow 1) existing practice in the telecommunications industry [...] or, conversely, 2) existing practice in the punched-card portion of the computer industry [...].

Well, who was the winner? --Abdull 20:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

EBCDIC is the descendent of punched-card codes, ASCII is a descendent of old Baudot-type codes, and pretty much everything else being used nowadays is a descendent of ASCII... AnonMoos 10:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Who's SSK as mentioned in this article? --Abdull 20:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Presumably some Scandinavian standards body not linked from the Wikipedia SSK disambiguation page. AnonMoos 10:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

SIS, Swedish Standards Institute, http://www.sis.se/, formerly Standardiseringskommissionen i Sverige (SSK). (The acronyms aren't 'linear', but the same goes for 'ISO'.) keka (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

'nough said. Shinobu 17:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done. — Loadmaster (talk) 06:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Does anyone know which character set 'IS' refers to in the table? --StuartBrady (Talk) 10:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Presumably something for Icelandic... AnonMoos 10:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

The table Characters for each ISO 646 compatible charset is incomplete. It only shows a few entries out of 128 possible. Is it that the missing entries are the same as ASCII? If so, that info is not in the article yet. Thanks. --Abdull (talk) 19:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I added the full 128 code table. — Loadmaster (talk) 06:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The red and white cells appear at random in the character table for combining characters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.175.168 (talk) 11:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

According to RFC1345 ISO646-KR differs from ISO646-US only in 0x5C position. 0x7E is '?. Same tilde symbol as ISO646-US

ISO646-CN, ISO646-GB and ISO646-SE have overline in 0x7E position and not tilde.

ISO646-US and ISO_646.irv:1991 are aliases.

ISO_646.irv:1983 has Cu in 0x24 position instead of $

In ISO646-HU 0x7E is U+02DD double acute accent and not tilde

--

Tokul (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

This article deals with ISO/IEC 646 which is a closed standard. ECMA-6 is an open standard published over internet.

Because ISO/IEC 646 is closed, it is not possible to verify what it contains. As ECMA-6 is publicly and freely available, it is more verifiable.

If verifiability import, and as both standards are very similar from each other, why not to have more focus on ECMA-6? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.75.160.141 (talk) 19:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Apparently it wasn't as historically central, despite being more Internet-accessible during the last 10-15 years... AnonMoos (talk) 23:26, 10 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

In the table "Characters for each ISO 646 compatible charset", comparing different versions of standard, the circumflex accent in ISO 646:1983 IRV on position 5E is given as corresponding to U+02C6 MODIFIER LETTER CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT . I thing, in the IRV version, the larger version of circumflex accent should be used; the U+005E CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiri 1984 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm searching references for national variants cited in article. Where is the info about combining characters (red background)?--Unjoanqualsevol (talk) 19:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Section 7 ("Composite Graphic Characters") of ECMA-6, for one... AnonMoos (talk) 06:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

In the article, it states that ISO/IEC 646-IRV is now identical to ASCII.

Yet in the table comparing all the different variants further down the page, ASCII (or 646-US) has 7E mapped as U+007E TILDE, while 646-IRV has it mapped as a different code point, U+02DC SMALL TILDE, which contradicts the above statement.

Then you have a similar deal with U+0027 APOSTROPHE and U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK.

I would fix that myself, but many other entries in the same row also list the same U+02DC character, so are all of those wrong too? 58.173.133.147 (talk) 04:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

I suspect it is the DEC Portuguese International Code page because there is no DEC Portuguese code page on the list, but IBM forgot to upload it!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexlatham96 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on ISO/IEC 646. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST-WITHDRAWN/ECMA-6%2C%204th%20Edition%2C%20August%201973.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST-WITHDRAWN/ECMA-6%2C%205th%20Edition%2C%20March%201985.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://msdn.microsoft.com/de-de/en-en/library/windows/desktop/dd317756%28v%3Dvs.85%29.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://dlx.bookzz.org/genesis/772000/c80a62495acf1e1a5b966de23c1f989a/_as/%5BInterface_Age_Staff%5D_Best_of_Interface_Age%2C_Volum%28BookZZ.org%29.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160530181116/http://aspell.net/charsets/iso646.html to http://aspell.net/charsets/iso646.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 8 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ISO/IEC 646. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160827000956/http://dlx.bookzz.org/genesis/772000/c80a62495acf1e1a5b966de23c1f989a/_as/%5BInterface_Age_Staff%5D_Best_of_Interface_Age%2C_Volum%28BookZZ.org%29.pdf to http://bookzz.org/dl/1210234/1105c6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply