On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:27:45PM -0400, Maiorana, Jason wrote: > I guess I wont be able to say that UTF-32 is a subset of UCS-4 > anymore. It seems to me that they are explicit in their motives: > that they are accepting the restriction so that UTF-16 wont > become a paraiah encoding.
So all Unicode encodings can be round-tripped. Surely a reasonable goal. > Regardless of this agreement, I hope that a proliferation of > UTF-8 encoders/decoders that only support 4-byte utf-8 doesnt > occur. I take it when you store decimal data, you store each digit in two bytes just in case? You know, some day we may want to store a number larger than 256 in that digit. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] What we've got is a blue-light special on truth. It's the hottest thing with the youth. -- Information Society, "Peace and Love, Inc." -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
