At Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:40:41 -0700,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, it will cause confusion, however stability, and 100% backwards
> compatibility is an overriding concern. I'd choose a little confusion
It's a BIG confusion.
> Oracle's had to do the same thing with their
> UTF8 character set to ensure backwards compatibilty and stability - leave
> it as-is, but document very clearly that it may not be what the user
> expects, and points them to an alternative character set setting
> (AL32UTF8).
What backward compatibility? When 8i was released, there was no
supplementary characters defined. Even in 9i, Oracle only supports
Unicode 3.0. They haven't officially supported supplementary
characters yet. Who suffers inconvenience? Does PoepleSoft use
supplementary characters in 8i or 9i? Too bad, you are using
unsupported functionality.
-----------------
Shigemichi Yazawa
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
