From: Jill Ramonsky (Jill.Ramonsky@aculab.com)
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 09:49:17 CST
I can't argue with that ... but my strings were always in (32-bit wide)
Unicode at "sort-time". I'm not sure exactly how much value there is a
lexicographical sort anyway. I mean, even in Latin-1, surely 'é' should
not come after 'z'?
Of course, UTF-16 doesn't have the binary sort property either.
Jill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 4:32 PM
> To: Jill Ramonsky
> Cc: unicode@unicode.org
> Subject: Re: Encoding for Fun (was Line Separator)
>
>
> UTF-8 has this property too. This protocol lacks, however, the binary
> sorting property that UTF-8 has.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 18 2007 - 15:54:24 CST