srivas sinnathurai <sisrivas at blueyonder dot co dot uk> wrote:
> The true lifting of UTF-16 would be to UTF-32.
>
> Leave the UTF-16 un touched and make the new half versatile as possible.
>
> I think any other solution is just a patch up for the timebeing.
There is no evidence whatsoever that this is a problem that needs to be
solved, not in 700 or 800 years, not ever. Ken's words are again being
ignored.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell Received on Mon Aug 22 2011 - 09:58:33 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Aug 22 2011 - 09:58:35 CDT