Stewart Stremler wrote:
UTF8 does give you that. UTF-16 (or is it UCS-16?) doesn't.
Actually, UTF-16 does, too.
http://www.terena.nl/library/multiling/unicode/utf16.html
"Basically, UTF-16 allows the inclusion of certain UCS-4 codes in a
UCS-2 encoded string. It does this by reserving 1024 high-half zone
codes from the BMP (D800 - DBFF) and 1024 low-half zone codes from the
BMP (DC00 - DFFF). Using a contiguous pair of codes as:
<high-half zone code> <low-half zone code>"
This is now supported in Java 1.5.
I prefer to use UTF-8, but UTF-16 is the default in Java.
And Unicode introduces *another* problem -- the problem of too-similiar
glyphs *explodes*. This is a security issue -- a boon to phishers all
over the world. If I can't set my locale (or toggle my display) so that
the extended character sequences show up as non-ambiguous character
sequences, I have a problem from the whole mess from the standpoint as
a user.
That's a similar issue to typosquatting.
The issue is a lack of being able to authenticate identity of a web site
unambiguously. Unicode makes that neither better nor worse.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
