Lars Kristan stated: > I said, the choice is yours. My proposal does not prevent you from doing it > your way. You don't need to change anything and it will still work the way > it worked before. OK? I just want 128 codepoints so I can make my own > choice.
You have them: U+EE80..U+EEFF, which are yours to use (or abuse) in an application as you see fit. Just don't expect others outside your application to interpret them as you do. > And once and for all, you can treat those 128 codepoints just as you > do today. A number of people on the list have patiently explained why what you are proposing to do fundamentally breaks UTF-8 and its relationship to other Unicode encoding forms. The chances that you will get the standard extended to incorporate these 128 code points and define their mapping to invalid byte values in UTF-8 is somewhere between zilch, nada, and nil. --Ken
