- From: Johnny Stenback <jst@w3c.jstenback.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:01:08 -0700
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>, Francois Yergeau <FYergeau@alis.com>, "'www-dom@w3.org'" <www-dom@w3.org>, www-dom-request@w3.org
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > At 12:27 PM -0700 9/19/03, Johnny Stenback wrote: > > >> I'm thinking of a closed system where you know that you'll never get >> anything other than UTF-8 (or whichever one you pick). In such cases I >> don't want to *force* code bloat on the implementation just to be able >> to claim compliance. > > > If that's a concern pick UTF-16. Its implementation is trivial. UTF-8 is > not that much harder. Both can be implemented algorithmically. I don't > believe there's a significant amount of code bloat here. > > Code bloat is not the only reason, the point is I don't want to force implementors to write code they know they don't care about, for whatever reason (code bloat, implementation time, QA resources, you name it). -- jst
Received on Saturday, 20 September 2003 14:02:21 UTC