[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question

To: Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@sun.com>
Subject: Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
From: MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 11:11:12 +0900
Cc: Marcin Hanclik <mhanclik@poczta.onet.pl>, ietf-charsets@iana.org
In-reply-to: <2147483647.1041520511@nifty-jr.west.sun.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;ned+ietf-charsets@mrochek.com
References: <20021225113735.8C21.MURATA@hokkaido.email.ne.jp><2147483647.1041520511@nifty-jr.west.sun.com>
Spam-test: False ; -2.3 / 5.2

Chris,

> Is UTF-8 perfect?

We agree :-)

>No.  But the costs greatly outweight the benefits when 
> compared to any other charset I've seen, and particularly when compared to 
> UTF-16.

I do not agree on this claim yet.  In particular, I'm concerned with the 6-byte 
representation of non-BMP characters.  When non-BMP characters become common, 
what will happen?

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
  - From: Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>

References:
- Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
  - From: MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
- Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
  - From: Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>

Prev by Date: Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
Next by Date: RE: internationalization/ISO10646 question
Prev by thread: Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
Next by thread: Re: internationalization/ISO10646 question
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread