[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Display types?
Paul Koning <email@example.com> writes:
> The UFT-8 and Unicode discussion in the Plan9 document that was quoted
> earlier makes the point that Unicode in its 16-bit form has the major
> problem that the byte order isn't well defined and cleanly handled.
> That does sound familiar, and it's totally unacceptable to introduce
> such a thing anywhere.
I don't get this. We are free to specify that unicode strings in spki
are always in network byte order (or the other way round, I don't
care). We only have to spell out the rules clearly. It's been done
before and it's no big deal.
Avoiding an endianness holy war is yet another *irrelevant* argument
for UTF-8. Next I'm expecting that we should use ascii decimal digits
for bignums, because binary encoding of integers can be done using
several incompatible byte orders, and this confusion is totally