Does the field in question need to support literally any possible character
in Unicode 3.0 and beyond (since 3.0 does not have any surrogates
assigned!)?
If not, then you can actually consider how big the field needs to be by the
characters being used and what is the largest per character byte count
needed.
Not ideal, but as long as you are using UTF-8 you may as well get the
biggest benefit, which is potentially more compact representation. I prefer
UTF-16, myself. :-)
michka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mikko Lahti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Unicode List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 4:28 PM
Subject: Oracle and Surrogate Pairs
> What is the correct way of supporting surrogate pairs in Oracle 8?
Anything
> wrong with approach of making fields 3 times longer from ASCII or should
> fields be 4 times ASCII as per UTF-8 spec?
>
> Later,
>
> Mikko
> Globalization Specialist
> Onyx Software
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.onyx.com
> 425.519.4172
>
>
>
