This UTF discussion has got silly. I am sitting at a computer that is operating in native Latin-1 and is quite happy - there is no likelyhood that UTF* is ever likely to reach it.
The Gillemets are coming through fine, but most of the other heiroglyphs need a lot to be desired. Lets consider the coding comparisons. Chars in the range 128-159 are not defined in Latin-1 (issue 1) and are used differently by windows to Latin-1 (later issues) so should be avoided. Chars in the range 160-191 (which include the gillemot) are coming through fine if encoded by the sender as UTF8. Anything in the range 192-255 is encoded differently and thus should be avoided. Therefore the only addition characters that could be used, that will work under UTF8 and Latin-1 and Windows are: Code Symbol Comment 160 Non-breaking space (map to normal whitespace) 161 ¡ Could be used 162 ¢ Could be used 163 £ Could be used 164 ¤ Could be used 165 ¥ Could be used 166 ¦ Could be used 167 § Could be used 168 ¨ Could be used thouugh risks confusion with " 169 © Could be used 170 ª Could be used (but I dislike it as it is alphabetic) 171 « May well be used 172 ¬ "Not"? 173 Nonbreaking "-" treat as the same 174 ® Could be used 175 ¯ May cause confusion with _ and - 176 ° Could be used 177 ± Introduces an interesting level of uncertainty? Useable 178 ² To the power of 2 (squaring ? ) Otherwise best avoided 179 ³ Cubing? Otherwise best avoided 180 ´ Too confusing with ' and ` 181 µ Could be used 182 ¶ Could be used 183 · Dot Product? though likely to be confused with . 184 ¸ treat as , 185 ¹ To the power 1? Probably best avoided 186 º Could be used (but I dislike it as it is alphabetic) 187 » May well be used 188 ¼ Could be used 189 ½ Could be used 190 ¾ Could be used 191 ¿ Could be used Richard -- Personal [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.waveney.org Telecoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.WaveneyConsulting.com Web services [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wavwebs.com Independent Telecomms Specialist, ATM expert, Web Analyst & Services
