[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
- From: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: David Brownell <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:13:14 -0700
At 10:11 AM 24/07/01 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
>Tim Bray responding to a question of mine:
>> Seems like the smart thing is to leave it in a String
>> for now, in the hope that the rest of the Java apparatus
>> will get non-BMP-savvy in the course of time, and you'll
>> be able to send these things to renderers and other
>> string-processing-functions and the Right Thing Will
>Except that changes the way programs working with
>individual "character" values will work: they'll have
>to convert to array-ish (string, char) representations.
>Plus, learn that some characters consume multiple
>indices ... that starts to touch on display issues, like
>combining characters, with similar problems.
Ouch, it's worse than I thought. One of the "nice" things
about the UTF16 surrogate system is that if you don't have
the apparatus around to deal with astral-plane chars, you
can just obliviously treat 'em as pairs of characters you
But XML carefully rules out that possibility, prod 
for "Char" rules excludes surrogate blocks. In retrospect,
maybe that was dumb?
Which means in effect that Dave's right, basically you just
totally can't use a java's String or char in dealing with
Blueberry docs. Or am I missing something... please? Or
re-open the door to the UTF-16 hack by putting the
surrogate blocks back into  as part of the Blueberry
Er, is anyone in the Java language team on top of what
Unicode's up to? This is a real problem.
Somebody ship some Prozac over to Elliote before he goes