Re: string vs. char [was Re: Java and Unicode]

From: Keld Jørn Simonsen (keld@dkuug.dk)
Date: Mon Nov 20 2000 - 14:01:42 EST

Next message: RiÄardas ÄŒepas: "Re: FW: Using Unicode with e-mail"
Previous message: R.C. Bakhuizen van den Brink [Rein]: "Re: FW: Using Unicode with e-mail"
Maybe in reply to: addison@inter-locale.com: "string vs. char [was Re: Java and Unicode]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 09:36:08AM -0800, Mark Davis wrote:
> The UTC will be using the terms "supplementary code points", "supplementary
> characters" and "supplementary planes". The term it is "deprecating with
> extreme prejudice" is "surrogate characters".
>
> See http://www.unicode.org/glossary/ for more information.

Thats good, as it is more in consistence with IS 10646.
10646 does not use the term "surrogate".

Keld

Next message: RiÄardas ÄŒepas: "Re: FW: Using Unicode with e-mail"
Previous message: R.C. Bakhuizen van den Brink [Rein]: "Re: FW: Using Unicode with e-mail"
Maybe in reply to: addison@inter-locale.com: "string vs. char [was Re: Java and Unicode]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:15 EDT