lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectUTF-8, OSTA-UDF [why?], Unicode, and miscellaneous gibberish
    On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Andrew E. Mileski wrote:

    > > > The OSTA-UDF(tm) filesystem I'm working on supports compressed Unicode.
    > > > Basically, the first byte is a flag inidcating how to expand the following
    > > > bytes:
    > > > 8 = high byte is 0 and low byte is from data stream
    > > > 16 = high byte is followed by low byte in the data stream
    > > > By the ISO standards, this is CS0 or a character set defined by agreement.
    > >
    > > Not yet another Unicode encoding format?! What's wrong with
    > > UTF-8? Not Invented Here?
    >
    > UTF-8 maps Unicode to a font as Unicode does not specify how a character
    > appears, but rather Unicode differentiates characters from each other.

    <pardon delay - was away fer a week... so don't mind if this is the
    umpteenth answer>

    Unicode : A set of encoding standards for storing international
    characters, yes?

    UTF-7 : a 7-bit way of encoding Unicode (and _ONLY_ Unicode)
    UTF-8 : a 8-bit ...
    UTF-16: a 16-bit
    UTF-32: The full Unicode (AFAIK)

    There's 64K tables of 64K characters. What's commonly encountered is only
    one table of Unicode characters (this is NOT UTF-16)

    AFAIK only 3 tables have been defined - the basic Unicode set (64K) and
    two tables for such large symbolic languages as Chinese....

    If you want bit encodings for UTF-8 I can provide them (but
    http://www.unicode.org is a better place to look :)

    There is NO font information anywhere in any of this mess.... Just a
    standard 'this character == this Unicode value'....

    Beyond that the Chinese still (AFAIK) decided whether or not to actually
    USE unicode [the language has other ways of creating new characters - this
    is not something computers are good at handling], Unicode has largely been
    accepted [mostly by fiat].


    Personally I think Unicode is a really good idea... I like the idea of
    being able to put descriptive filenames in files.
    sometimes the native language [eg Japanese] is the only way to describe a
    file.

    Not that it matters but I think as long as filenames from 16bit+
    filesystems should be encoded into UTF-8 before being passed to the user.

    So what filesystems are dependant on what character set?

    FAT : 8-bit IBM-PC
    VFAT : 16-bit Unicode
    ext-2 : Latin-1? (though UTF-8 is supported)
    HPFS : global translation table (8bit -> 16bit Unicode?)
    NTFS : as HPFS I think

    This is all I know of....

    Sure would be nice to be able to emulate ioctl's on existing devices BTW -
    being able to COMPLETELY emulate a console could be valuable <g>....
    [I have a graphical console that emulates everything except ioctl's...]
    (though 'kon' is faster <sigh>)


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.022 / U:30.544 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site