[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"Alessandro Triglia" <sandro@mclink.it> writes:
> I don't see how the lists can be changed in the future, since we are talking
> about an encoding. Changing the lists would mean that the encoding becomes
> a different encoding, and must have a different name (UTF-8+names-1,
> UTF-8+names-2, etc.). The last thing we want is interoperability problems
> between different versions of the *same* encoding that decode the same byte
> sequence in different ways. So any list that is initially specified must be
> carved in stone.
Haven't we been there? Latin-1? Latin-2? 8859-15? The lists were
carved in stone, and the stones kept piling up until Unicode came and
made one level gravel field out of all these stones.
But this is a proposal about writing Unicode in some other (less
capable but more easily typed) character set, so we might as well
explicitly state which encoding it is.
So we can have UTF-8+names-15+MacCyrillic. Can we have
UTF-8+names+UTF-8?
Ari.
--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.
|
