Re: utf-8 vs. utf-32

• Previous message: Andrew Dunbar: "Re: undo and combining characters"
• In reply to: Tomas Frydrych: "Re: utf-8 vs. utf-32"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

 --- Tomas Frydrych <tomas@frydrych.uklinux.net>
wrote: >
> > > utf-32 more memory for most people.
> >
> > For *all* people. Almost all characters fit in
> UTF-16 without
> > using surrogates, and certainly all the most
> commonly characters
> > do. Surrogates will be very rare.
>
> I did not know that. In that case, I am not sure we
> really want to
> abandon the internal 16-bit representation at the
> moment.

Chinese names are the most important thing in the
surrogate area. Without support for this area you
cannot represent the name of the president of China!
AbiWord should be the default word processor in China
(:

16-bit unicode is often referred to as "the worst of
both worlds". Most companies or projects that
implemented Unicode back when it was forever going to
be 16 bits now have many headaches.

Andrew Dunbar.

> Tomas

=====
http://linguaphile.sourceforge.net http://www.abisource.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

• Next message: Tomas Frydrych: "Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Previous message: Andrew Dunbar: "Re: undo and combining characters"
• In reply to: Tomas Frydrych: "Re: utf-8 vs. utf-32"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 24 2002 - 11:23:31 EDT