On 2007-10-19, Russell Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One advantage of unicode encoding is that every character has the > same meaning independant of any tag things. That makes it easy to > cut and paste multilingual text between applications without any > out-of-band communication of encoding tags. This statelessness > is the most worthwhile advantage IMO. UTF-8 could be considered > a common inter-app encoding protocol, and apps can use whatever > encoding they want internally.
That's up to for individual protocols to specify, or (preferrably) not specify. A single protocol is in any case easier to ugprade to a better encoding than a global monoculture. Applications hardly can use whatever encoding they want to use internally if libraries force a monoculture. The best approach is abstraction, an encoding blackbox, but such a fundamental tenet of good software design tends to not be appreciated these days, because any possibility for alternatives is a big no-no. Megalomaniac rigid and bureaucratic structures are in. -- Tuomo _______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list wm-spec-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
