From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jan 09 2006 - 21:43:47 CST
Kenneth Whistler <kenw at sybase dot com> wrote:
>> Another related question: Why isn't there a standard 16-bit UTF
>> that preserves the binary ordering of codepoints?
>> (I mean for example UTF-16 modified simply by moving all
>> code units or code points in E000..FFFF down to D800..F7FF
>> and moving surrogate code units in D800..DFFF up to F800..FFFF).
> Huh? Because it would confuse the hell out of everybody and lead
> to problems, just like any other putative fixes by proliferation
> of UTF's.
My question is, what would be the value of such a UTF? What would it
> Sorting UTF-16 in binary order is easy. See "UTF-16 in UTF-8 Order",
> p. 136 of TUS 4.0.
Or see CESU-8 for the solution to a the opposite "problem," viz: sorting
UTF-8 in non-binary order.
-- Doug Ewell Fullerton, California, USA http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 09 2006 - 21:45:04 CST