>>| C1 says "A process shall interpret Unicode code values as 16-bit
DE> I think the focus here was supposed to be on the fact that Unicode code
DE> values are *not 8-bit* quantities.
This may be the path to an update that is pithy yet true. The original
mantra, paraphrased in C1 and 1), was just "Globally replace 8 by 16".
Reality later obsoleted the original design, bringing us UTF-8, surrogates,
and UTF-32; all good things, but less pithy. Since we needn't quibble
terminology in an informal statement, I wouldn't have a problem with the
1) Unicode code units are not 8 bits long; deal with it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT