[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Display types?

>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk> writes:

 Ben> Niels Möller wrote:
 >>  Paul Koning <pkoning@xedia.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.

 Ben> I don't get it either, but in my case its because I thought
 Ben> Unicode allowed either byte order, and which you are using is
 Ben> obvious because of the leadin character (0xfffe).

Right.  That's a typical bad committee solution to the problem.  The
right solution is to fix the order, that way only half the platforms
have to do extra work rather than all the platforms having to do twice 
as much extra work.

Imagine how poorly the internet would run if TCP had the byte order in 
its headers selected by the first byte of the header.  Even OSI never
did that...


Follow-Ups: References: