Mark Davis wrote:
> If you want portability, you won't go there. Even with the
> same IANA name, the probability that two codepage mappings
> on different platforms produce precisely the same results
> in all circumstances is, in our experience, very very low.
Yes, I want to be able to say with a reasonable degree of confidence that if
I receive something that I believe to be "UTF-8", then I can rely on Java's
"UTF8" to decode it, and likewise if I want to produce something that I
could accurately call "KOI8-R", I could use Java's "KOI8_R".
I should not be surprised by your statement, but I am. It is distressing to
think that something that by definition should not be rocket science --
repertoires of abstract characters mapped directly to specific bit patterns
-- would be subject to such haphazard definition and even more haphazard
implementation.
- Mike
____________________________________________________________________
Mike J. Brown, software engineer at My XML/XSL resources:
webb.net in Denver, Colorado, USA http://skew.org/xml/
