On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 00:42:54 -0700
David Starner <prosfilaes_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 23:21:38 -0700
> > David Starner <prosfilaes_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Richard Wordingham
> >> <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >> > Using 99 = (3 +
> >> > 32 + 64) PUA characters, one can ape UTF-16 surrogates and
> >> > encode:
> >
> > The PUA is in general not available for
> > general utilities to make special use of.
>
> No, the PUA is not. Then where are you getting the 99 PUA characters
> you suggested using?
By escaping them as well. The point of the complex scheme is to keep
searching simple. Using a general escape character doesn't work so
well.
Richard.
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
Unicode_at_unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
Received on Tue Jun 03 2014 - 03:03:47 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jun 03 2014 - 03:03:47 CDT