On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 16:00:41 +0800
Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> > Does this mean UTF-8 was chosen only because it is more compatible
> > with existing pascal programs? Any other reasons?
> >
>
> Is UTF-16 cover all languages? As I know it have problems with
> Chinese and/or Japanese languages. While utf-8 doesnot have such
> problems. More over most software uses English as default language.
> UTF-8 encoded English words are still the same as non-encoded English
> words.
>
> Btw, I dont know other advantages.
UTF-8, UTF-16 and UTF-32 are just different encodings for the same
unicode characterset.
UTF-16 is often confused with UCS-2, which is indeed only 2-byte
characters and has the widestring advantage (length=#words). But
for the price, that it does not support all characters. That's why M$
switched from UCS-2 to UTF-16 keeping the W functions, which may be one
of the main reasons for the confusion.
Mattias
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
