At 14:13 99/09/26 -0700, Karl Pentzlin wrote:
> -----Urspr$B—O(Jgliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul Dempsey (Exchange) <paulde@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
> An: 'Karl Pentzlin' <email@example.com>; Unicode List
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. September 1999 21:11
> Betreff: RE: UTF-8, U+0000 and Software Development (was: Re: New UTF-8
> decoder stress test file)
> > Using UTF-8 to represent a 0 byte without 0-valued bytes is misusing UTF-8
> > (at least for text interchange).
> > ...
> > I've written quite a lot of text-processing code in C/C++ that handles
> > embedded NUL characters. There's nothing intrinsic to the language that
> > makes it especially difficult. I just don't use much of the standard ISO C
> > library.
> That is (somewhat exaggerated), to conform to one standard (UTF-8 encoding
> U+0000 strictly by a 0 byte), you decide against another standard (the ISO
> standard C libraries) - a standard which also was made for interchange,
> namely for program source interchange between different operating systems.
No. UTF-8 requires to use a 0 byte for 0 just so that it can work together
with C libraries. Nobody every asked for a way to encode the 0 character
in ASCII as anything else that a 0 byte, so why should this suddenly
be necessary for UTF-8?
#-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, World Wide Web Consortium
#-#-# mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.w3.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT