[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] [Summary] UTF-8 Question: e with acute accent should require two bytes, right?
- From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@talsever.com>
- To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:50:19 -0400
On 2007-09-29 19:10:02 -0400 Rick Marshall <rjm@zenucom.com> wrote:
> Most character encodings used for more complex character sets have
> ASCII as
> their starting point. They are ASCII extended for ... by ... This
> includes
> the UTF codings.
Uh. It includes UTF-8. I do not believe that it includes UTF-16
(unless you wish to elide the high byte altogether), in either BE or
LE variants. I don't think it includes UTF-7, either. Any argument
that claims that ASCII is a subset of UTF-16 has to do some violence
to the notion of ASCII, since ASCII is not defined for a sixteen-bit
wide encoding (even if it doesn't say anything about the meaning of
the high bit in an eight-bit field, either).
Amy!
--
Amelia A. Lewis amyzing {at} talsever.com
What's the end of a story? When you begin telling it.
-- Ursula K. Le Guin
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]