On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 08:04, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:15:56PM +0100, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
>> >From
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language_and_computers#Character_encodings>:
> ISTM that since all the mapping tables are public it should be a SMOP
>
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:15:56PM +0100, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
> >From
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language_and_computers#Character_encodings>:
>
> "Unicode is supposed to solve all encoding problems in all languages
> of the world. [..] There are still controversies. For Japanese,
2010/12/20 Martijn van Oosterhout :
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
>
>> UTF-8 is not a superset of all encodings.
>
> I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
> heard this before but never found what's missing. [citation needed]?
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 03:08:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kenneth Marshall writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> [citation needed]? Exactly what characters are missing, and why would
> >> the Unicode people have chosen to leave them out? It's not like they'
Kenneth Marshall writes:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> [citation needed]? Exactly what characters are missing, and why would
>> the Unicode people have chosen to leave them out? It's not like they've
>> not heard of those encodings, I'm sure.
> Here is an intere
On Dec 20, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> Here is an interesting description of some of the gotchas:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows-1252
FWIW, those are gotchas translating between Windows 1252 and Latin-1. Windows
1252's nerbles translate to UTF-8 just fine.
David
--
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:10:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >> I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
> >> heard this before but never found what's missing. [citation
David Fetter writes:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> I think you mean Unicode is not a superset of all character sets. I've
>> heard this before but never found what's missing. [citation needed]?
> Windows-1252, ISO-2022-JP-2 and EUC-TW are such encodi
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:01:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> I agree that "the default encoding is UTF-8", but it should be
> > >> configurable by the 'encoding'
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I agree that "the default encoding is UTF-8", but it should be
> >> configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
> >
> > Why is it necessary to have such a paramete
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 01:34, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree that "the default encoding is UTF-8", but it should be
>> configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
>
> Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all?
UTF-8 is not a superset of all encodings.
--
Itagaki Takahiro
Tom Lane writes:
> Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all? AFAICS it just
> adds complexity for little if any gain. Most extension files will
> probably be pure ASCII anyway. Dictionary files are *far* more likely
> to contain non-ASCII characters. If we've gotten along fine with
Itagaki Takahiro writes:
>> Oh, I wasn't aware that Itagaki-san had objected to Tom's proposal.
> I agree that "the default encoding is UTF-8", but it should be
> configurable by the 'encoding' parameter in control files.
Why is it necessary to have such a parameter at all? AFAICS it just
adds
>>> - Did we decide to ditch the encoding parameter for extension scripts
>>> and mandate UTF-8?
>>
>> No we didn't, we decided that the default encoding is UTF-8 and that any
>> contrib script defaults to UTF-8, so that it's not necessary to care
>> about the 'encoding' parameter in the control fi
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:30 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> I spent a little time looking at this tonight. I'm going to give you
>> the same general advice that I've given other people who have
>> submitted very large patches of this type: it'll be a lot easier to
>> get th
Hi,
Thanks for your review and your time. Trying to answer some of your
points there:
Robert Haas writes:
> I spent a little time looking at this tonight. I'm going to give you
> the same general advice that I've given other people who have
> submitted very large patches of this type: it'll be
16 matches
Mail list logo
