Re: HTML5 encodings (was: Re: BOCU patent)

From: Mark Crispin (
Date: Sun Dec 27 2009 - 13:24:25 CST

  • Next message: verdy_p: "Re: HTML5 encodings (was: Re: BOCU patent)"

    On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, Doug Ewell wrote:
    > Because of the surrogate mechanism, there is no way I personally would
    > consider UTF-16 to be "simpler" than UTF-32. In the best case, it is "as
    > simple as" UTF-32. It has other advantages, mostly related to size, but
    > simplicity over UTF-32 is not one of them.

    [I couldn't resist!]

    UTF-18 is both simpler than UTF-16 and has size advantages over UTF-32.

    OK! OK! I'm sorry! ;)

    -- Mark --
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 27 2009 - 13:27:35 CST