> > Agrees, the design of how UTF-8 encodes and decodes can be expanded to > > support more bits... so that's why UTF8 should be reasonable to be the > long > > term solution for designing i18n applications, including IDN... > > Please, everybody, read the definition of UTF-8 before making these > claims that it supports an encoding structure wider than 31 bits. (And > please read the statements of WG2 and Unicode concerning expansion > beyond U+10FFFD.) > > UTF-8 seems to have taken on a mystical quality whereby it can now > provide food for the starving, shelter for the homeless, etc.
The word "EXPAND" here means it can be extended or modify to cope with future requirements over the limits now... i didn't say that it is "READY" to support more... any one that reads carefully show see the words "can be expanded" and not "can be able" : )
