Unicode has changed and evolved over the years. At this point, UCS-2 is a funny beast, because it shares precisely the same encoding space as UTF-16. That is, in code units there is absolutely no difference between them. The only real difference is whether you interpret the code units in the range D800..DFFF. (Interpret them correctly, of course!) As a serialization, UTF-16 has three forms: UTF-16, UTF-16BE, and UTF-16LE. The first is with (optionally) a BOM, and the others without. Since UCS-2 shares the same coding space, and thus serialization, it's not really a good idea to speak of UCS-2LE etc.; much better to just use the UTF-16 names. The best way I find to think of UCS-2 at this point is *not* (𝑛𝑜𝑡) another encoding, but rather simply a shorthand for a particular supported subset of UTF-16. In that way, it is like other subsets: for example, I can talk about the Cyrillic-block repertoire in UTF-16. Mark
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Asmus Freytag
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Asmus Freytag
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system addison
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Doug Ewell
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Michael \(michka\) Kaplan
- RE: Unicode in VFAT file system Jonathan Rosenne
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- RE: Unicode in VFAT file system Marco . Cimarosti
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Mark Davis
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system John Cowan
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Michael \(michka\) Kaplan
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system John Cowan
- RE: Unicode in VFAT file system Asmus Freytag
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Asmus Freytag
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system Peter_Constable
- RE: Unicode in VFAT file system Jonathan Rosenne
- Re: Unicode in VFAT file system addison