someone suggested something more utf-16-centric earlier on this list for
this purpose.
i don't like it because it makes it ambiguous what code points in the
private use planes mean.
someone who uses these beyond-unicode code points should use ucs-4 or
utf-8. conversion into a variation of utf-16 should not be attempted.
we should get iso to recommend or force any codes beyond U-0010ffff not to
be used at all (is there not already a proposal for this?).
of course, everyone is free to create his or her own encoding... (i
suggested one before :-)
markus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT