Talk:ISO/IEC 8859-6
 | ISO/IEC 8859-6 received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
I've corrected the charset table using [1].
Still needs exansion in text, references, and the charset tables should at some point be programmatically generated to eliminate the possibility of typos.
See also Talk:ISO_8859, Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#ISO_8859, and Wikipedia:Peer_review#Two_articles_on_typographical_characters
Pjacobi 13:34, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Coverage
[edit]Might explain that it fails to cover the needs of any language other than Arabic itself -- it's conspicuously lacking characters used in Persian, Urdu, Pashto, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Was it possibly designed only for Arabic, not for "scripts using the Arabic Alphabet"?Spitzak (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sure that was the case, but practical code pages by computer manufacturers generally included at least the main Persian and Urdu characters, and it seems a little odd that there are so many undefined gaps in the standard which could have been used for such characters... AnonMoos (talk) 12:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Numbers under the characters
[edit]One needs to explain what's the number under the characters, like 60C etc. These seems to correspond to the Unicode representation of these characters, but is this part of the discussed standard? בוקי סריקי (talk) 09:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- See http://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/ISO8859/8859-6.TXT -- AnonMoos (talk) 02:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
ASMO 449
[edit]The ASMO 449 page redirects to here. It's probably a mistake since ASMO 708 and ASMO 449 are two different encodings, ASMO 449 has characters[2] that are not present in ASMO 708. Code Page Guy (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)