On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:49:34PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Philipp Kern wrote: > > >> Of course there's a penalty for certain operations. But UTF-8 is about > > >> as compact as an extended encoding is going to get. > [...] > > make UTF-8 bad per se to call it "rubbish". > > I didn't call utf-8 itself rubbish, I am myself a strong proponent for > utf-8, only your quote that it is "about as compact as an extended encoding > is going to get". I should have qualified it with "that is both 8-bit and backward- compatible with ASCII". Other encodings will be more compact, but AFAIK there isn't a more compact UCS encoding, though UTF-16 /might/ be more compact for certain languages, albeit without any 8-bit backward compatibility. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Description: Digital signature