John W Kennedy wrote:
On May 23, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Jim Allan wrote:
Wasn’t it Microsoft who invented ODBC which has been generally adopted
in the Linux and Unix world as well?
It's glue. Not even Microsoft can sell broken glue.
How has Microsoft screwed up Unicode? (Yes, I am aware that the
identify the \ characters with the ¥ character on Japanese computers,
but that is the only example I know of where they go against Unicode.)
Seems to me they were the most persistent supporters of Unicode in the
early days when no-one else was supporting it.
I have heard that it was Microsoft that started the unapproved and
frequently maddening trick of putting a BOM into UTF-8.
If you have something to blame Microsoft for, then document it, as
people have for the OOXML fiasco or discrepancies from standard HTML, or
some of their dirty tricks or mistatements.
Your comment about broken glue doesn’t make sense to me at all.
Microsoft currently uses UTF-16 internally which can use initial BOM. So
there is nothing wrong there with Microsoft using initial BOM. Check the
Unicode manual.
The problem is with converting UTF-16 to UTF-8 but not dropping an
initial BOM when doing this. If it is a Microsoft converter that does
this, then it is indeed Microsoft’s fault. Otherwise it isn’t
Microsoft’s fault. If Microsoft doesn’t follow standards it is blamed,
and when it does follow standards it is blamed.
I am quite ready to accept that it is Microsoft’s fault, if indeed it
is. But I would you like to hear more details than “I have heard...”.
But I am tired of hearing everything blamed on Microsoft.
Jim Allan
Jim Allan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
