Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!alberta!edm!rroot
From: rroot@edm.UUCP (Stephen Samuel)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
Subject: Re: Esperanto (was Re: All numeric representation of dates)(long)
Message-ID: <3277@edm.UUCP>
Date: 22 Sep 88 22:59:27 GMT
References: <1437@spp2.UUCP>
Organization: Unexsys Systems Inc., Edmonton,AB.
Lines: 44

From article <1437@spp2.UUCP>, by urban@algol (Michael Urban):
> argument that Esperantists face is the more naive `but English is
> already the de facto standard international language.' 

>>But back to Esperanto, I really don't feel that it is a language worth
>>studying.  It is kind of like Latin, a dead language since it isn't used
>>much.  
> 
> The number of speakers is approximately on a par with Icelandic.  But
> .....   t I won't bother with it').  Most computers speak ASCII,
> not Latin-1, but that is hardly a reason to ignore Latin-1.

>  Only in the last few
> years have American computer manufacturers heeded the long-standing
> European need for an 8-bit alphabet (and we will note that DEC's 8-bit
> code is different from the Macintosh's, which is different from

A long time ago, people were using all sorts of codes for character
representation. The codes for 'a' and 'A' were almost as varied as the
number as manufacturers (possibly, even, MORE varied).
  Nontheless: somebody came up with the Idea of a 'standard character
set' which would make it possible for different manufacturer's
systems to use the same codes for their text characters 
(or, at least, have a standard intermediate character set to transmit 
data with).
  Needless to say: even today (decades later) people are still using
vendor-specific codes for character representation, but a LOT of 
people are now using ASCII, and it's generally possible to take
text from one system; translate it to ASCII; transport it to a second
system and translate the ASCII to that system's form without (in 
most cases) loosing very much important information.   The system 
may not be perfect, but it DOES work reasonably well...

I see (as do, I think, most others) Esperanto as being the natural-
language equivalent of English.  It may not be perfect but it IS
well-defined and, if enough people learn it (and this seems to be
the case), there will be a reasonably consistent way of getting stuff
from one language to another.

-- 
-------------
 Stephen Samuel 			Disclaimer: You betcha!
  {ihnp4,ubc-vision,seismo!mnetor,vax135}!alberta!edm!steve
  BITNET: USERZXCV@UQV-MTS