On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree that the default encoding is UTF-8, but it should be
configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
Why is it necessary to have such a
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree that the default encoding is UTF-8, but it should be
configurable by the
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
heard this before but never found what's missing. [citation needed]?
Windows-1252, ISO-2022-JP-2 and EUC-TW are
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
heard this before but never found what's missing.
On Dec 20, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
Here is an interesting description of some of the gotchas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows-1252
FWIW, those are gotchas translating between Windows 1252 and Latin-1. Windows
1252's nerbles translate to UTF-8 just fine.
David
--
Kenneth Marshall k...@rice.edu writes:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
[citation needed]? Exactly what characters are missing, and why would
the Unicode people have chosen to leave them out? It's not like they've
not heard of those encodings, I'm sure.
Here is an
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 03:08:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Kenneth Marshall k...@rice.edu writes:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
[citation needed]? Exactly what characters are missing, and why would
the Unicode people have chosen to leave them out? It's not like
2010/12/20 Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@svana.org:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
UTF-8 is not a superset of all encodings.
I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
heard this before but never found what's missing. [citation
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:15:56PM +0100, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
From
URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language_and_computers#Character_encodings:
Unicode is supposed to solve all encoding problems in all languages
of the world. [..] There are still controversies. For Japanese, the
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 08:04, Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@svana.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:15:56PM +0100, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
From
URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language_and_computers#Character_encodings:
ISTM that since all the mapping tables are public it
Hi,
Thanks for your review and your time. Trying to answer some of your
points there:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I spent a little time looking at this tonight. I'm going to give you
the same general advice that I've given other people who have
submitted very large patches of
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:30 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I spent a little time looking at this tonight. I'm going to give you
the same general advice that I've given other people who have
submitted very large patches of this
- Did we decide to ditch the encoding parameter for extension scripts
and mandate UTF-8?
No we didn't, we decided that the default encoding is UTF-8 and that any
contrib script defaults to UTF-8, so that it's not necessary to care
about the 'encoding' parameter in the control file there.
Itagaki Takahiro itagaki.takah...@gmail.com writes:
Oh, I wasn't aware that Itagaki-san had objected to Tom's proposal.
I agree that the default encoding is UTF-8, but it should be
configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all?
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all? AFAICS it just
adds complexity for little if any gain. Most extension files will
probably be pure ASCII anyway. Dictionary files are *far* more likely
to contain non-ASCII characters. If we've gotten
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree that the default encoding is UTF-8, but it should be
configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all?
UTF-8 is not a superset of all encodings.
--
Itagaki
16 matches
Mail list logo
