[XML-SIG] Re: Issues with Unicode type

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 22:39, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> 
>>I book all this under FUD. It'll take a bit of time, but we'll
>>eventually move there. For now, I think the issues around
>>surrogates and the need for non-BMP code points in real life
>>applications are a bit overhyped.
> 
> 
> I think that it depends what we call real life and more precisely if you
> consider that the full conformance to standards and W3C recommendations
> is part of the real life or not.
 >
> Having never met the need before, I can't consider non BMP code points
> as an absolute requirement by themselves.

See, that's what I meant :-) We'll get there in time; until then,
I'd suggest to use UCS4 builds to write standards implementations.

 > ...
> Again, we can say that it won't matter for "real life applications" and
> that we don't care about conformance but that's a dangerous path.

I never suggested that; only to give it some time... heck, Java
isn't even near being standards conform and neither is Windows.
Both were built on top of Unicode 2.x at a time when people thought
that 65k chars would be more than enough for all time (hmm, I remember
I thought the same a few years back when I bought a 2GB fixed disk ;-).

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
_______________________________________________________________________
eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,...
Python Consulting:                               http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                    http://www.egenix.com/files/python/