On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 06:12:13PM +0200, Thomas Wolff wrote: > I have not heard anything like this before (about changing behaviour > of emitted replacement characters)
So far there lived two concurrent definitions of UTF-8, one defined it to be at most 4 bytes long, while the other one defined 6 bytes. If I correctly understand the thread that's just been discussed on this list, starting at: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/2007-04/msg00050.html then from now on everyone defines UTF-8 to be at most 4 bytes long. And in this case I think the proper behavior would be to emit 5 or 6 bytes. Think of it: this is what you would do if 5 and 6 byte UTF-8 wasn't ever defined. > Why cannot a long UTF-8 sequence that happens to map to a code point which is > not Unicode just be displayed with one replacement character? I'd perfectly agree with you, I also dislike this 4-byte limitation and preferred the 6-byte version. But apparently this is not what Unicode-gurus have decided to have. That's why I'm asking gurus here (especially Markus) what to do know. -- Egmont -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
