On Nov 25, 2010, at 5:56 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:

> But as I think about it it more likely was a statement about Java's
> implementation (because a char has only 16 bits which is not
> sufficient for all Unicode code points).

I believe you are referring to the complaints the Asian cultures sometimes raise against Unicode.  If so, I'll try to recap the issues, as I understand them.

First, Unicode is a bit larger than their native encodings.  Typically they get everything they need into two bytes where Unicode requires more for their languages.

The Unicode team also made some controversial decisions that affected the Asian languages, like Han Unification (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_unification).

Finally, they have a lot of legacy data in their native encodings and perfect conversion is sometimes tricky due to some context sensitive issues.

I think the Asian cultures have warmed a bit to Unicode over time (my opinion only), but it's important to remember that adopting it involved more challenges for them.

James Edward Gray II