On 11/06/2015 01:32 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:41:42 -0700
"Doug Ewell" <[email protected]> wrote:
Richard Wordingham wrote:
No-one's claiming it is for a Unicode Transformation Format (UTF).
Then they ought not to call it "UTF-8" or "extended" or "modified"
UTF-8, or anything of the sort, even if the bit-shifting algorithm is
based on UTF-8.
"UTF-8 encoding form" is defined as a mapping of Unicode scalar values
-- not arbitrary integers -- onto byte sequences. [D92]
If it extends the mapping of Unicode scalar values *into* byte
sequences, then it's an extension. A non-trivial extension of a
mapping of scalar values has to have a larger domain.
I'm assuming that 'UTF-8' and 'UTF' are not registered trademarks.
Richard.
I have no idea how my original message ended up being marked to send to
this list. I'm sorry. It was meant to be a personal message for
someone who I believe was involved in the original design.
