- From: Francois Yergeau <FYergeau@alis.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:00:10 -0500
- To: 'Keld Jørn Simonsen ' <keld@dkuug.dk>, 'Markus Scherer ' <markus.scherer@jtcsv.com>
- Cc: 'charsets ' <ietf-charsets@iana.org>
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote: >> Anyway, you can use the UTF-* names instead of the above. > >that would not refer to the ISO standard, but to Unicode > in stead. There are subtle differences in doing that. RFC 3629 now standardizes UTF-8 as the Unicode-defined encoding of the characters defined by ISO 10646. Hopefully, that will help put to rest those old sterile squabbles about Unicode vs 10646. Respecting UTF-16 vs ISO-10646-UCS-2 however, there is a real difference, the latter being restricted to U+FFFF. But who wants to do that today anyway? -- François
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 21:02:04 UTC