> OK, maybe someone's name is one character that's not possible to represent with Unicode. What do you want me to do about it? The example with The Artist Form

> OK, maybe someone's name is one character that's not possible to represent with Unicode. What do you want me to do about it? The example with The Artist Formerly Known as Prince is rather contrived. More realistic is the Chinese family names which are not yet supported by Unicode. But if you can get away with it, it is perfectly reasonable business decision to only support names which can be represented as Unicode characters! The point of the article is just that you should be aware about the assumptions you make, and the less assumptions you need to make, the fewer problems. A less contrived example would be the forms which required a last name of at least two characters. This is just dumb, since "O" is a perfectly valid and even reasonably common last name. So the writers put in extra effort to outlaw certain names, for no benefit whatsoever. Presumably they thought all real names are at least two characters long. Knowing this was a faulty assumption would have saved them the time they spent on making their site less useful.