[lkml]   [1997]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: UTF-8, OSTA-UDF [why?], Unicode, and miscellaneous gibberish
    On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Peter Holzer wrote:

    > > It should be possible to _choose_ mapping as the mount option, not
    > >"UTF-8 or all filenames will be truncated to the first letter because
    > >second one is zero".
    > You are mixing up 16-Bit Unicode and UTF-8 here. In UTF-8, Unicode
    > characters 0000 to 007f are mapped to single bytes with the same value.
    > All other codes are mapped to multi-byte sequences where all bytes have
    > the MSB set.

    But if the only alternatives will be UTF-8 or "no translation at all",
    that will leave only UTF-8 usable -- taking plain ASCII filename in the
    form how it's stored on NTFS (16-bt Unicode) produces a string,
    unusuitable for any string processing. IMHO if one wants to support such a
    thing, replaceable name-translation interfaces should be used, not
    hardcoded UTF-8.


     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.017 / U:7.660 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site