Re: Unicode for words?

From: D. Starner (
Date: Sun Dec 05 2004 - 03:18:11 CST

  • Next message: Richard Cook: "Re: Unicode for words?"

    "Tim Finney" <> writes:
    > This would reduce the
    > bandwidth necessary to send text.

    Would it really? Ignoring all the other details (being limited
    to English, for one), would words that might take up to six bytes
    in UTF-8 really compete with the normal encoding, with most words
    taking less than that? And that's for uncompressed text; if space
    was really such a concern, you'd be compressing the text, so you
    need to compare bzip2 or gzip or whatever the new compression is
    on UTF-8 to this encoding, which would even it up quite a bit, if
    past results mean anything.

    Storing a table of several million words to convert text from the keyboard
    to this encoding is going to be eating up a lot of space, and many
    places where smaller text sizes would be important wouldn't want to
    include 8 MB of data and a CPU powerful to quickly compress and decompress
    from this format.

    Sign-up for Ads Free at

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 05 2004 - 03:18:58 CST