Re: UTF-17

[John Cowan]

Roozbeh Pournader scripsit:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Carl W. Brown wrote:
> 
> > If they like length maybe we could encode UTF-32 in '1' and '0' characters
> > for a fixed 21 byte encoding.
> 
> Is this a record? UTF-168?

No, no.  It's just an extension of UTF-32, so it should be called UTF-33.

-- 
John Cowan                                   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
        --Douglas Hofstadter