In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/26/2005
at 08:33 AM, Steve Comstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>All data is either UTF-32 text or binary
Why not provide for optionally storing data in the more compact UTF8
and UTF16? They could still be presented to the applications as UTF32.
You need the transform code regardless, so why not take advantage of
it?
>Never need a code page again.
You'll still need the accursed things for communication with the
outside world.
>Never have competing architectures
That's what IBM claimed for S/360; the competing[1] IBM architectures
came on its heels, in droves.
[1] E.g., S/7, S/1, S/3, 8100.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
