> From: Peter_Constable@sil.org [mailto:Peter_Constable@sil.org]
> On 03/08/2001 07:40:25 PM "Ayers, Mike" wrote:
> > If you really want to finish the job, there's always
> UTF-32, which
> >should do rather nicely until we meet the space aliens aith the
> >4,293,853,186 character alphabet!
> Um... no. The 1,113,023 character alphabet (one more than the
> scalar values in the codespace supported by UTF-8 / 16 / 32).
Um... no. The UTF-32 CES can handle much more than the current
space of the Unicode CCS. As far as I can tell, it's good to go until we
need more than 32 bits to represent the ACR. I'm actually surprised that
this comment was so misunderstood. Ah, well...
P.S. If the acronyms didn't make sense, try
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:20 EDT