On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, srintuar26 wrote:
> > Is it true that "Almost all modern software that supports Unicode, > > especially software that supports it well, does so using 16-bit Unicode > > internally: Windows and all Microsoft applications (Office etc.), Java, > These decisions seem designed mostly to ease compatibility with > Microsoft's OS. I agree. Or, for the lack of foresight... > The Asian-language argument for UTF-16 seems > mostly vacuous, and even if it were true it would be the lone Here again I agree. The worst case (text made entirely of chars. between U+0800 and U+FFFF) is 3:2. With characters below U+0800 (especially US-ASCII range) mixed up, the ratio is even lower. For CJK Ext. B and C, UTF-8, UTF-16 and UTF-32 are all even. Jungshik -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
