On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:52:09 -0400, tedd wrote: > At 8:52 PM +0200 5/28/10, Nisse =?utf-8?Q?Engstr=C3=B6m?= wrote: >>On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:13:35 -0400, tedd wrote: >> >> > As is my understanding, UTF-8 will accommodate all the languages >>> (glyphs) of the world and then some. It will be a while before we >>> need UTF-16 or UTF-32 but those are just a larger super-sets. Again: >>The theoretical limits are: >> >> UTF-8 [0 - 7fffffff] >> UTF-16 [0 - 10ffff] >> UTF-32 [0 - ffffffff] In what way are UTF-16 and -32 super-sets of UTF-8? >>Also, there are many, many, *many* more glyphs than >>characters (code point) in the world. As an example, >>www.fonts.com lists 165,125 fonts. Every one has a >>*different* glyph for the characer "A"... > As you say, UTF-8 has a range of 0 to 7FFFFFFF No, I said that's the theoretical range. It is restricted to [0-10ffff] according to current specifications. > If you spend some time looking at the numerous char sets that Unicode > offers you will see that just about every symbol known to man has > been cataloged Yes. (Except those that are missing). > every language in the world and glyph known to man has been > included -- a truly massive project. No. There are no glyphs in Unicode. This is spelled out for you in chapter 2, figure 2-2. "Characters versus Glyphs". /Nisse -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
