You're right of course... I just kept meaning to and never remembered it until it was too late. I guess I should have filed a bug. ;-) -- Andrew C. Oliver http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi For Java and Excel, Got POI? The views expressed in this email are those of the author and are almost definitely not shared by the Apache Software Foundation, its board or its general membership. In fact they probably most definitively disagree with everything espoused in the above email. > From: Avik Sengupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Itellix Software Solutions Pvt Ltd > Reply-To: "POI Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 19 Dec 2003 21:38:48 +0530 > To: POI Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Character encoding > > It is bogus, yes, but I would be strongly against API changes at this > change. We dont want people to have compilation problems when moving > from RC1 to RC2 or 2final. It isnt a big deal technically, but may be > very painful psycologically.. > > Lets do it for 3.. i'll do it myself. > > On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 21:12, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >> Lets change that constant for 2.0. Its totally bogus. ENCODING_DOUBLE_BYTE >> and ENCODING_SINGLE_BYTE make sense. The constant has nothing to do with >> whether or not UTF_8 or 16 are used in truth. I just had no real clue about >> character encoding when I made it. What do you guys think? If yes, then >> I'll fix it. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
