3 ms·
I was reading this and I'm like, Unicode (I assume UTF-8) isn't really that complicated at all. The UTF-8 system is straightforward, no more complex than simple
by lyndonh 13y ago
I was reading this and I'm like, Unicode (I assume UTF-8) isn't really that complicated at all. The UTF-8 system is straightforward, no more complex than simple run length coding. I'm also thinking that Unicode is basically a list of glyphs in every language plus a few control codes for rendering glyphs correctly, BOM, etc.
It's like saying a dictionary contains dangerous information.
I think the problem is software that enables Unicode input but is not willing to handle all the different types of input. For example, it seems like a bad idea to even let people input combined words of different languages; that's why we have input methods that filter out bad combinations; and dumping this on the font renderer without making sure the difference is highlighted.
- rkangel 13y agoThe article here relates to Unicode in general rather than any of its specific encodings (the author themselves gets confused by this in the first paragraph). This is quite a good article that explains the difference (particularly of use to Python users): http://nedbatchelder.com/text/unipain.html http://nedbatchelder.com/text/unipain.html
- lyndonh 13y agoWell UTF-16 and UTF-32 are less complex than UTF-8. My point is that codings aside, it's just a big table of characters plus some command codes.
- sesqu 13y agoWords of different languages are often suggested for a ban, but fail the real-world test. Countless languages borrow words from one another, especially names. For example, some people argue that calling Marie Skłodowska-Curie simply Curie misrepresents her character naïvely, as her name and country of birth were important to her. You could, of course, latinize it, but that gets you into trouble with the Turks and the Koreans and essentially all languages that had writing before the industrial age.