Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8

From: Hans Aberg (
Date: Wed Jan 19 2005 - 12:38:22 CST

  • Next message: Hans Aberg: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"

    On 2005/01/19 02:02, Philippe Verdy at wrote:

    >> You probaly mean that the overloaded UTF-BSS (or whatever the correct name
    >> is)
    > I wonder if there's a "correct name" for it. It seems that the most correct
    > name for this traforms would be the reference to the old RFC describing it,
    > even if the title of the informative RFC gives "UTF-8" incorrectly; and even
    > if there's a symbolic name to refer it, but only as a local symbol pointing
    > to the bibliographic reference at end of the text.

    I think there is a gap in the standards to not give it a name. It makes
    discussions as it here difficult. Generally, standards just define what is
    legal, and does not provide names for what is outside it. A name like
    CPBTF-8 ("code point to binary transformation format") seems more
    appropriate, since it not a transformation dealing with characters at all,
    but only dealing with how to transform code points into bytes.

      Hans Aberg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 19 2005 - 12:39:28 CST