> There's at least some argument for the existence of UCS-4. I think advocacy for 4 bytes per codepoint misses the mark. People tend to erroneously assume tha

> There's at least some argument for the existence of UCS-4. I think advocacy for 4 bytes per codepoint misses the mark. People tend to erroneously assume that this takes away all complexity and brings us back to an ASCII-like reality of random access and 1 integer per glyph. However Unicode is full of complexities that mean that is not attainable. (Joiners, combining characters, and bi-di are a few.)