On 22 August 2011 12:51, Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/22/2011 03:05 PM, Andrew West wrote:
>>
>> Can anyone think of a way to extend UTF-16 without adding new
>> surrogates or inventing a new general category?
>
> Why would anyone *need* to do so? UTF-16 can represent all codepoints upto
> Plane 16 right?
To clarify, I was replying to Richard Wordingham's tongue in cheek
suggestion to extend UTF-16 to go beyond Plane 16 in the year 2790 or
when only one free plane remains. I am not advocating extending
UTF-16 or the Unicode code space, or suggesting that it will ever be
necessary to do so.
But hypothetically, I don't see a way to extend UTF-16 without
breaking the stability policy. The same stability policies would also
prohibit the assignment of any area of the Unicode code space for code
page usage as Srivas Sinnathurai has proposed. (If there was an
automatic filter on ideas that break one or more stability policies
this mailing list would be a far quieter place.)
Andrew
Received on Mon Aug 22 2011 - 07:49:49 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Aug 22 2011 - 07:49:50 CDT