Re: current idea

[David Starner <dstarner98@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 11:58:39PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> That may be true now, but personally, I wouldn't bet on it.  One of
> the strengths of Unicode as opposed to legacy encodings is that it can
> expand to service new needs, which I think was made eminently clear
> with the introduction of the Euro symbol.

More interesting for your case, the Mathematical Alphanumerics,
numbering about a thousand. Still, I don't see where 700 more blocks
like the Mathematical Alphanumerics will come from.
 
> All I'm saying is don't take too much for granted.

Microsoft, and much of the rest of the world, has millions of systems
depending on 20.1 bit Unicode. The standard guarentees it. To change it
would be like changing the number of octets for IP. Okay, sure, it can
be done; but with massive backward-compatibilty issues over a period
over at least a half decade. And unlike IP, no one sees the number of
characters running out; there's more than enough room for everything
anyone can forsee.

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
"I saw a daemon stare into my face, and an angel touch my breast; each 
one softly calls my name . . . the daemon scares me less."
- "Disciple", Stuart Davis
--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/