Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.030 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.94; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:text': 0.05; 'ascii': 0.09; 'subject:question': 0.10; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; '16-bit': 0.16; '7.0': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'unicode.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'wed,': 0.18; 'examples': 0.20; '(in': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'unicode': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'rest': 0.29; 'expansion': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'lists': 0.32; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'useful': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.38; 'recent': 0.39; 'aside': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'back': 0.62; 'more': 0.64; 'different': 0.65; 'talking': 0.65; 'mar': 0.68; '2015': 0.84; 'change?': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.92 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=kzuzv0pnKtP848U0M5VISQAAWDMakwQd6dv3mQuAicg=; b=cUnxXXzJlMtkfcZ0vC6m8epz59vBJBSAZHIR1CZpmvm0UlLYh2u0Zu6S6flxvgDN49 vSCMu/PUBUT2/DD6/A4AJe0/D6jPxJqqQ7bcS1qB2f/kumLX7UxroEAuWXMvtC5b3kci C+E/kH7g4+KT6AUst3o1o7Z9uF4pwBS89n/NBGef9rDxMtimqUU/SKl9LAGPWW3hm3aK ZsgPkrWYF3Y2xxnrP0jhPkUyN0mbZKZFPphAmianRhRcJirTFx5CLl7rRViN77xvBIkL /0lyddTpIwjbzbvogHBjFmFHr+9Ilto6KuFEz8244F3R+mbsp7LNLoz8//T8YmWvuW9B FcWQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.128.219 with SMTP id k88mr7706152ioi.27.1425444897799; Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:54:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <132d5ce6-f672-4eec-99f9-1cc9e88b94f3@googlegroups.com> References: <54EC5FA4.6070703@davea.name> <201502241455.t1OEtffT016452@fido.openend.se> <201502241507.t1OF7aUm018883@fido.openend.se> <201502241524.t1OFO09k022270@fido.openend.se> <201502241620.t1OGKf4n002146@fido.openend.se> <54ECB134.5090304@davea.name> <201502241945.t1OJjshO013092@fido.openend.se> <201502241957.t1OJvrJS015604@fido.openend.se> <9169f3b1-2ac7-42a3-8033-584f84b88a1f@googlegroups.com> <7a75a23c-4678-4d7a-a2ec-9e8fff4c07f8@googlegroups.com> <132d5ce6-f672-4eec-99f9-1cc9e88b94f3@googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 15:54:57 +1100 Subject: Re: Newbie question about text encoding From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.19 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 23 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1425444900 news.xs4all.nl 2846 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:55926 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:86886 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > > It lists some examples of software that somehow break/goof going from BMP-only > unicode to 7.0 unicode. > > IOW the suggestion is that the the two-way classification > - ASCII > - Unicode > > is less useful and accurate than the 3-way > > - ASCII > - BMP > - Unicode How is that more useful? Aside from storage optimizations (in which the significant breaks would be Latin-1, UCS-2, and UCS-4), the BMP is not significantly different from the rest of Unicode. Also, the expansion from 16-bit was back in Unicode 2.0, not 7.0. Why do you keep talking about 7.0 as if it's a recent change? ChrisA