RE: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8

From: Lars Kristan (
Date: Sat Jan 22 2005 - 02:41:14 CST

  • Next message: Lars Kristan: "RE: The "JDGI" file grows"

    Rick McGowan wrote:

    > If said compiler is a commercial product, however, the *customer* is
    > always right. So the marketing department would beat up the
    > engineering
    > department until they "fixed" the compiler to accept UTF-8
    > with or without
    > leading "EF BB BF".

    And I see Unicode as a commercial product. And I will beat the UTC up until
    they (you?) fix it to allow processing invalid sequences, for the purpose of
    processing legacy encodings as if they were UTF-8 text. It cannot always be
    done. When it cannot, validation applies, signalling applies, dropping
    applies. But often it can be done. Why prevent it? Customers want it.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 22 2005 - 02:43:33 CST