We're in the I18N engineering business and we have frequently
reccomended that clients move to Unicode as soon as possible even if the
operating systems they have to support don't yet support Unicode. In
the cases where support is not present in the OS there is an added
conversion step to the native encodings that are supported by the OS,
but that is generally outweighed by the advantages of adopting Unicode.
See a description of our portable C++ Unicode support library at
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nitsan Seniak [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:28 PM
> To: Multiple Recipients of
> Subject: Re: Properties of multibyte encodings
> Greg Hullender wrote:
> > What might make it more interesting (and more relevant) to this
> group would
> > be if you explained why you don't use Unicode instead? You could
> > import/export of a host of other encodings, but do all internal
> > in Unicode. Is there some reason why that doesn't work for you?
> I'm working on a portable C++ library, which is supposed to be usable
> on a wide
> rangeof platforms and environments. If I was guaranteed that Unicode
> works on
> the major platforms (Windows 95/NT, Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, Linux, Sinix,
> love to use it.
> But maybe this is already true?
> -- Nitsan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:38 EDT