Guido van Rossum [guido@python.org] wrote: > I've heard a few people claim that strings should always be considered > to contain "characters" and that there should be one character per > string element. I've also heard a clamoring that there should only be > one string type. You folks have never used Asian encodings. In > countries like Japan, China and Korea, encodings are a fact of life, > and the most popular encodings are ASCII supersets that use a variable > number of bytes per character, just like UTF-8. Each country or > language uses different encodings, even though their characters look > mostly the same to western eyes. UTF-8 and Unicode is having a hard > time getting adopted in these countries because most software that > people use deals only with the local encodings. (Sounds familiar?) Actually a bigger concern that we hear from our customers in Japan is that Unicode has *serious* problems in asian languages. Theey took the "unification" of Chinese and Japanese, rather than both, and therefore can not represent los of phrases quite right. I can have someone write up a better dscription, but I was told by several Japanese people that they wouldn't use Unicode come hell or high water, basically. Basically it's JJIS, Shift-JIS or nothing for most Japanese companies. This was my experience working with Konica a few years ago as well. Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@amber.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4