Raul, I am pretty sure that the Unicode Technical Committee think it is a standard, although it has developed over a number of versions as characters are added or moved from private encoding to publicly defined encodings.
https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode12.0.0/ch01.pdf Is that what you mean by overlapping standards? It is pretty clear that UTF-32 encoding would never accept surrogate pairs as code units in any version. Cheers, bob > On Sep 13, 2019, at 10:50 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:08 PM 'robert therriault' via Programming > <[email protected]> wrote: >> So, where does this leave us? Well, we are kind of... sort of... doing >> unicode, but in the process of making the process convenient, we have >> drifted from the actual unicode standard. > > Unicode is not a single standard, but a bunch of overlapping standards > and recommendations. > > (J itself also has a variety of standards and expectations, typically > representing refinements of ideas used elsewhere.) > > Anyways, it doesn't fit the design of Unicode for the core language to > implement all of the unicode standards. It's perfectly alright to have > library code implement errors, if that makes the underlying > implementation simpler. For example. And, if someone sees enough need > to implement those errors, of course. > > Or have I overlooked something important? > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
