- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:45:01 -0800
- To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 3:58 PM -0800 11/29/00, John Boyer wrote: >Anyway, Jeff's point about UCS-2 != Unicode has now hit home thanks to some >of the examples in the UTF-8 spec. These examples clearly show triplets of >UCS-2 values being used to form a single character, which does not appear to >be permissible under UTF-16. It appears that you are badly mis-reading the UTF-8 spec. None of the examples show "triplets of UCS-2 values being used to form a single character". > Since the Unicode manual is quite clear on the >equivalence between Unicode and UTF-16 (p. 19), this would mean that UCS-2 >!= Unicode. There isn't anything on p. 19 that says what you say. What p. 19 says is "The default encoding form of the Unicode Standard is 16-bit". A default encoding is far from saying that there is an equivalence. >So it would seem that we need to include UCS-2 in the list of things that >should not have NFC applied. <sigh> I think I'm just going to let Martin sort this out; that's his job. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2000 19:45:12 UTC