On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 5:35 PM David Starner via Unicode < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 10:41 PM Shawn Steele via Unicode > <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMO, since it's unlikely that anyone expects > that they can transmit a NUL through an arbitrary channel, unlike a > random private use character. You would be wrong. NUL is a valid codepoint like any other; except like in the C standard library and descendants. And, I expect it to be maintained. And, for the most part is, (except for emscripten) > > -- > Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero. >
