Re: FYI: Some links about UTF-16

[srintuar26 <srintuar26@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Is it true that "Almost all modern software that supports Unicode,
> especially software that supports it well, does so using 16-bit Unicode
> internally: Windows and all Microsoft applications (Office etc.), Java,
> MacOS X and its applications, ECMAScript/JavaScript/JScript, Python,
> Rosette, ICU, C#, XML DOM, KDE/Qt, Opera, Mozilla/NetScape,
> OpenOffice/StarOffice, ... "?

These decisions seem designed mostly to ease compatibility with
Microsoft's OS. The Asian-language argument for UTF-16 seems
mostly vacuous, and even if it were true it would be the lone
redeeming feature of UTF-16. (I found it outrageously laughable
that the unicode spec dwells on that for several paragraphs.)

UTF-16 is a miscarriage of design strung together to justify
the mistakes made by those whe assumed "16 bits is enough".
Forward looking applications use UTF-8 internally.

Even microsoft cant scourge themselves of it completely: C++,
text files, html, XML, email, etc are probably never going to be
in native utf-16.
--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/