[I18n-sig] Re: Unicode 3.1 and contradictions.

[Martin v. Loewis]

> My list of unwanted UTF-8 code points was just the one found in a note
> in the UTF-8 definition in ISO 10646-1:1993 (R.4):
> 
>   NOTE 3 - Values of x in the range 0000 D800 .. 0000 DFFF are reserved
>   for the UTF-16 form and do not occur in UCS-4.  The values 0000 FFFE and
>   0000 FFFF also do not occur (see clause 8).  The mappings of these code
>   positions in UTF-8 are undefined.

That explains a lot. Apparently, Unicode takes the stand of making the
undefined well-defined, which is just in the spirit of standards:
Unicode is an extension to ISO 10646, in this respect.

Regards,
Martin