> > SCSU doesn't look very nice for me. The idea is OK but it's just
> > too complicated. Various proposals of encodings differences or xors
> > between consecutive characters are IMHO technically better: much
> > simpler to implement and work as well.
>
> These differential schemes seem to b
From: Kevin Bracey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Much as I love SCSU, and much as my web browser supports it, it's not the
> sort of thing to start encouraging on the wire when there are already
> existing standards to deal with this.
Why not? It can be further compressed by currently existing mechanisms
From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> UTF-16 is not just 2 bytes, it is sometimes 2 and sometimes 4 bytes.
> IETF is recommending UTF-8 as the prime charset in all Internet protocols.
Blah. For his purposes, UTF-16 is 2 bytes. The odds his newspaper will have
significant quantities of no
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> None as far as I know, which sort of destroys the whole plan. It would
sure
> be nice if MSIE and Navigator started "quietly" supporting SCSU, in the
same
> way that they "quietly" (to the average user) began supporting UTF-8.
If you want the code in Navigator, write
> Unfortunately, you don't hear much about SCSU, and in particular the Unicode
> Consortium doesn't really seem to promote it much (although they may be
> trying to avoid the "too many UTF's" syndrome).
Probably that's one point. But also, SCSU is something that's a little more
complicated to
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Raw UTF-8 4,382,592
> Zipped UTF-82,264,152 (52% of raw UTF-8)
> Raw SCSU1,179,688 (27% of raw UTF-8)
> Zipped SCSU 104,316 (9% of raw SCSU, < 5% of zipped UTF-8)
The data set is truly pa
In a message dated 2001-07-13 7:00:26 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Sounds promising! How well does SCSU gzip?
If gzip works anything like PKZIP, the answer is, very well indeed. This is
because (using the explanation I have heard before) SCSU retargets Unicode
text to
In a message dated 2001-07-13 4:07:35 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> SCSU doesn't look very nice for me. The idea is OK but it's just
> too complicated. Various proposals of encodings differences or xors
> between consecutive characters are IMHO technically better: much
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> As a test, I downloaded the first article on the page:
>
> http://unicode.ethiozena.net/Gazettas/Kibrit/Archives/1993/Hamle/05/Kibrit.051
> 193.sera.html
>
> The article, dated 1993-05-11, has the formidable title:
>
Yesterday in the Ethiopian calendar :)
> «
Fri, 13 Jul 2001 03:01:10 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> Unfortunately, you don't hear much about SCSU, and in particular
> the Unicode Consortium doesn't really seem to promote it much
> (although they may be trying to avoid the "too many UTF's" syndrome).
SCSU doesn't look
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 02:14:25AM +0100, David Starner wrote:
> > As someone involved in the service I often wish there was some
> > form of "compressed" Unicode encoding. The 3-byte penalty that
> > Ethiopic bears under UTF-8 turns into higher bandwidth that web
> > hosting services meter and c
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Encoded in UTF-8, the file was 1891 bytes long. Converted into SCSU, it
> dropped to 1121 bytes, which is 40% shorter than the UTF-8 version, better
> than UTF-16, and probably better than any existing legacy encoding for
In a message dated 2001-07-12 22:55:09 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> SCSU is also registered as an IANA charset, although you are
>> unlikely to find
>> raw SCSU text on the Internet, due to its use of control
>> characters (bytes below 0x20).
>
> And what browser suppo
In a message dated 2001-07-12 8:27:20 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> The Ethiopian News Headlines has relocated to a new server at
> http://www.ethiozena.net/ and is making it easier than ever to
> read news headlines in Unicode. A companion Unicode only server
> is laun
> SCSU is also registered as an IANA charset, although you are
> unlikely to find
> raw SCSU text on the Internet, due to its use of control
> characters (bytes
> below 0x20).
And what browser supports SCSU, and what it that browser's reach in term of
population? Because that's usually what m
> As someone involved in the service I often wish there was some
> form of "compressed" Unicode encoding. The 3-byte penalty that
> Ethiopic bears under UTF-8 turns into higher bandwidth that web
> hosting services meter and charge for by the megabyte. For a
> popular site this soon makes UTF-8
I should have also mentioned that SCSU is fully supported by the programming
toolkit ICU (International Components for Unicode), found at:
http://oss.software.ibm.com/icu/
An Open Source project, ICU is available for free and comes with voluminous
documentation.
SCSU is also registered as
In a message dated 2001-07-12 8:27:20 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As someone involved in the service I often wish there was some
> form of "compressed" Unicode encoding. The 3-byte penalty that
> Ethiopic bears under UTF-8 turns into higher bandwidth that web
> hostin
18 matches
Mail list logo
