Was: How can I avoid unicode and use Latin1?
On 5 Sep 2005, at 08:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. I didn't know unicode was broader than UTF-8.
Formally, one assigns to abstract characters different non-negative
integers, called in Unicode lingo "code points". In order to get this
stuff into a computer, one needs an integer to binary translation
function. This is what UTF-8 does. Different translation functions
provide different encodings of the same code points.
The 3-byte value
10FFFF (rather than FFFFFF) seems like a rather strange upper limit,
When UTF-16 was designed, one did not think clearly about the above
separations, so therefore one thought this upper limit was necessary.
The limitation is though imposed by Unicode Inc.; the original ISO
UTF-8 does not do that (so there are two differing versions of UTF-8
in play). Also, the number of available code points is for the
fundamental Unicode Inc. character range so well enough that it will
not fill up in hundreds of years at the current rate of character
addition. Only if people are allowed to massively register private
characters, might it break.
but
that only points up the fact that I'm going to have to learn about
unicode
once I get through my current arranging binge.
You can read about UTF-8 at
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/unicode.html
Today, Windows uses Unicode exclusively -- even in North America.
You
won't have big success with latin1 files.
I routinely switch files between Latin1 text and MS-Word docs with no
problem whatsoever. ... Microsoft's unicode claims are a marketing
ploy; Latin1 still
rules.
Editors often have a preference where the default encoding can be
chosen. And the output encoding can also be chosen automatically. For
example, the mailer I use, scans through the email, and chooses the
encoding suitable, ASCII, ISO-Latin-1, or UTF-8, for example.
Hans Aberg
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
