Re: UTF-7 - I'm not really smarter

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Tue Mar 28 2006 - 21:43:49 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Representative glyphs for combining kannada signs"

    Otto Stolz <Otto dot Stolz at uni dash konstanz dot de> wrote:

    > The description in RFC 2152, chapter 4, is probably misleading to
    > the uninitiated. The key to understanding is that all UTFs are
    > equivalent: they encode the same character set, viz. the whole Uni-
    > code, and any string encoded in one UTF can be easily transformed
    > into any other.

    I wouldn't have used the word "easy" to describe conversions into and
    out of UTF-7. I'd reserve that for UTF-8 and -16 and -32, schemes that
    can reasonably be done with pencil and paper.

    Doug Ewell
    Fullerton, California, USA

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 28 2006 - 22:07:24 CST