Guido van Rossum wrote: > I was specifically reacting to your use of the phrasing "I'm very > tempted to support UTF-8"; this wording suggests that it would be your > choice to make. I could have pointed out the obvious (that equating > the difficulty of using UTF-8 with that of using UTF-16 doesn't make > it so) but I figured the other readers are also tired of your attempts > to move this into an entirely different direction, and based on a > thorough lack of understanding of the status quo no less.
Is there a design document explaining the rationale of unicode type, the status quo? Any time this subject is raised on the mailing list, the net result is "you guys don't understand unicode". Well, let us know what is good and what is bad of the current unicode type; what is by design and what is an implementation detail; what you want to absolutely keep, and what you want to absolutely change. I am *really* confused about the status quo of the unicode type (which is why I keep myself out of technical discussions on the matter of course). Is there any desire to let people understand and join the discussion? Or otherwise, let's decide that the unicode type in Py3k will not be publically discussed and will be handled only by the experts. This would save us from these "attempts" as well. -- Giovanni Bajo _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
