Re: Unused Unicode planes

From: Michael D'Errico (
Date: Sat Jan 10 2009 - 23:14:01 CST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Unused Unicode planes"

    Doug Ewell wrote:
    > See, this is why people have to stop talking about how evil and
    > dangerous the PUA is. Creative minds look for alternatives such as
    > "extending" the Unicode architecture beyond plane 16, which is orders of
    > magnitude more evil and dangerous.

    Well people say if you want to encode non-plain-text things, then you
    need to start your own standard. Plain text is a subset of everything
    you would want to encode, so it makes sense to include everything from
    Unicode in this new standard. Trying to minimize the effort required
    to implement a new standard, it also makes sense to utilize the UTF-8
    mechanism (without the 17 plane artificial limitation placed on it) to
    access the Unicode part as well as the new non-plain-text part. There
    is nothing "evil and dangerous" about it, just unfamiliar and untested.

    The problem with this is that some programming languages have chosen
    to use UTF-16 internally and thus can not access the planes beyond 16,
    so this hypothetical new standard is dead on arrival. Unicode will
    never need many of the planes it has staked a claim on, but it is
    unlikely that any would be relinquished for such a new standard so that
    it could function using UTF-16. I'd say that that is more "evil".


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 10 2009 - 23:17:26 CST