If you want to use Shodou for a report cover or something,
here goes something I made up
At 09:10 -0800 2001-03-08, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
In Mark Davis' Unicode transcriptions page
(http://www.macchiato.com/unicode/Unicode_transcriptions.html) it is
mentioned a previous meaning of the word Unicode:
"A telegraphic code in which one word or set of letters represents a
sentence or
Generally, UTF-8 is a quicker-and-dirtier method of getting Unicode
support into a legacy product. The work that goes into supporting UTF-8
in 8-bit clean code is analogous to multibyte enabling: you have to
provide functions for moving the pointer about, searching, etc.
This *can* be less work
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
In Mark Davis' Unicode transcriptions page
(http://www.macchiato.com/unicode/Unicode_transcriptions.html) it is
mentioned a previous meaning of the word Unicode:
"A telegraphic code in which one word or set of letters represents a
[I'm still 140 messages back, so this might already have been covered.]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Aren't Serbian and Croatian the standard example of two "languages" that are
really the same language but are treated separately (a) for political reasons
and (b) because Cyrillic is used to
Hello,
Actually, as you also implied in your email, since an UTF-16 character can be
a two-byte entity or two two-byte entity, there will be no significant
difference between UTF-8 and UTF-16 in terms of how to count and/or decide
character boundaries in a string. I.e., a UTF-8 character could
Has anyone seen any market data that indicates market acceptance
of Unicode? I found a brief paragraph in the FAQ on Unicode which
is suggestive, but I would like to find something that says
by the year 200x, n% of messages on the web will be encoded as
Unicode, or n% of products will be
If you really want to finish the job, there's always UTF-32, which
should do rather nicely until we meet the space aliens aith the
4,293,853,186 character alphabet!
/|/|ike
P.S. No, they're not Klingons!
From: Ienup Sung [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I think we shouldn't advocate
Hmmm... As many people in this mailing list already know that
the coding space for UCS-2 is 64K, UTF-16/UTF-32 is 17 x 64K, and UCS-4
is 2G, and, so I think you meant 17 x 64K = 1,114,112 not 4,293,853,186 ??
With regards,
Ienup
] Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 20:02:39 -0600
] From: "Ayers, Mike"
I think you missed Addison's point.
There is TRULY a significant difference between UTF-8 text and UTF-16 text
on so many different levels that claiming they are all in the same
"multibyte" realm (along with DBCS, etc.) is almost laughable.
I won't laugh, since I have been in MBCS muck (for
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Tex Texin wrote:
When I talk to business people about market acceptance as a function
of Java, XML, other standards and products such as database and
office tools support it today, its still not as compelling as
a statement that by this date, if you aren't supporting
Not really. For one, many companies use platforms other than Windows.
tex
Pierpaolo BERNARDI wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Tex Texin wrote:
When I talk to business people about market acceptance as a function
of Java, XML, other standards and products such as database and
office tools
12 matches
Mail list logo
