Re: Tech: Unicode (was...)

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 06:37:29AM -0700, Philippe Caquant wrote:
> This is a "e acute": é
> and this, a "e grave": è
Those arrived intact, although the headers claimed the message was
US-ASCII; I had to modify the headers in my copy in order to convince my
mail client to display them as anything other than question marks (?).

>  "Your outgoing messages are currently encoded
> with a US-ASCII character set.   We hope to add
> foreign character support in the near future. ". Oh,
> thank you so much, Mr Yahoo.
On recoit ce qu'on paie. :)

> for what you sent (+BBAEEQQSBBM), I read +BBAEEQQSBBM,
> and I haven't the faintest idea what it could mean,
That is the correct UTF-7 sequence.  If you're willing to
paste sequences of numbers into Word and run a macro to turn them
into readable text, why are you not equally willing to do the same thing
for sequences like the above?

> If there is a rule saying that in Unicode, Hex-413 is
> Cyrillic 4th letter of the alphabet in capitals (Ge),
> so just tell me it's Hex-413 and I'll be able to read
> it, and redraw it (although it would be better if a
> macro could do it for me). If there is no such rule,
> then I can't see any interest for Unicode at all.
Of course there is such a rule.  That is what Unicode is, primarily: a
mapping from numbers to characters.  The number 1,043, which is 413 in
hexadecimal, is associated with CYRILLIC CAPITAL LETTER GHE.

-Mark

Reply