RE: Corrigendum #9

2014-06-12 Thread Peter Constable
From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Karl Williamson Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 9:30 PM > I have a something like a library that was written a long time ago > (not by me) assuming that noncharacters were illegal in open interchange. > Programs that use the library

Re: Corrigendum #9

2014-06-12 Thread Richard Wordingham
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 01:37:49 -0700 Markus Scherer wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Karl Williamson > wrote: > > The FAQ mentions using 0x7FFF as a possible sentinel. I did not > > realize that that was considered representable in any UTF. > > Likewise -1. > No, and that's the poi

Re: Corrigendum #9

2014-06-12 Thread David Starner
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Markus Scherer wrote: > If your library makes an explict promise to remove noncharacters, then it > should continue to do so. There is rarely so much frustration as when a library or utility changes behavior and the justification is that well-understood practice w

Re: Corrigendum #9

2014-06-12 Thread Markus Scherer
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: > I have a something like a library that was written a long time ago (not by > me) assuming that noncharacters were illegal in open interchange. Programs > that use the library were guaranteed that they would not receive > noncharacters in t