Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

[Russ Allbery]

Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> It does bring up a deeper issue, however. Unicode is, at the moment,
> apparently inadequate to represent at least some part of the asian
> languages. Are the encodings currently in use less inadequate? I've been
> assuming that an Anything->Unicode translation will be lossless, but
> this makes me wonder whether that assumption is correct.

I'm pretty sure that Unicode includes everything that was actually in a
widely used character set.  This person was going on about characters only
present in ancient Taoist texts; I'm guessing that none of the other
national character sets have ever bothered assigning code points to them
either.

Particularly since part of his contention is that 16 bits isn't enough,
and I think all the widely used national character sets are no more than
16 bits, aren't they?

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>