On 6/26/18, Michael Enright wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:33 AM, Lee wrote: >> I'm still trying to figure utf-8 out, but it seems to me that 0x0 - >> 0xff is part of the utf-8 encoding. > > I don't see how you arrived at this.
I screwed up trying to do hex in my head. For whatever reason I didn't want to write 0 - 127 > An initial byte of 0xFF is not > the initial byte of any valid UTF-8 byte sequence. And it doesn't > conform with the statement you have later: right, I screwed up :) > The standards such as IETF RFC-3629 are easy enough to read, so I > recommend using them and citing them to others instead of trying to > summarize. Thanks for the RFC reference - I hadn't come across that one yet. Lee -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
