Tatsuo Ishii kirjutas N, 06.02.2003 kell 17:05: > > Perhaps we should not call the encoding UNICODE but UTF8 (which it > > really is). UNICODE is a character set which has half a dozen official > > encodings and calling one of them "UNICODE" does not make things very > > clear. > > Right. Also we perhaps should call LATIN1 or ISO-8859-1 more precisely > way since ISO-8859-1 can be encoded in either 7 bit or 8 bit(we use > this). I don't know what it is called though.
I don't think that calling 8-bit ISO-8859-1 ISO-8859-1 can confuse anybody, but UCS-2 (ISO-10646-1), UTF-8 and UTF-16 are all widely used. UTF-8 seems to be the most popular, but even XML standard requires all compliant implementations to deal with at least both UTF-8 and UTF-16. -- Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster