On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:

> :) The reason I've pointed to that section, is that there will be no
> difference in ISO/IEC 10646 and Unicode very soon in sense of covered code
> space.

Right. They're *reducing* the ISO/IEC code space to match Unicode.

> This means as soon as it will be acomplished, uniform expansion to
> unused bits in 32-bit space will start.

I very, very much doubt that. Remember, Unicode uses 16-bit code values,
and all high and low surrogate characters are immediately identifiable.
Breaking this would result in much, much pain.

> If CJK community will have
> interest in it, of course. As you may remember, there were some complaints
> in past about 'small' code space for covering CJK in Unicode. It wouldn't
> be so relatively soon.

Yeah, but for day to day use, nobody even uses the surrogate pairs. This
is part of the whole point of Unicode; you can safely ignore them or do
only very minimal processing to deal with them, and all but specialized
applications will still work.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson  <cjs / cynic.net>   +81 90 7737 2974   http://www.netbsd.org
    Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light.  --XTC