• From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@j...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 06:04:34 -0500

> Er... AFAIK you can represent the exactly the same characters in UTF-8
> and UTF-16, since both are transformation formats of the full 32 bit
> Unicode.  Maybe I'm missing something here...?

I don't think this is true.

UTF-8 and UTF-16 are transformations formats of ISO10646, not Unicode.

UTF-8 gives access to all 2^31 characters from the UCS repertoire.

UTF-16, however, only gives access to the equivalent of Unicode with the
surrogate extension mechanism, ie the first 17 planes of the UCS.

James Tauber




xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: UTF-8 vs UTF-16...? (Was: Feeling good about SML)
    • From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>

• Prev by Date: (My) Feeling About SML
• Next by Date: Fwd: Announcement of draft-murata-xml-01.txt
• Previous by thread: (My) Feeling About SML
• Next by thread: Re: UTF-8 vs UTF-16...? (Was: Feeling good about SML)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread