From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <83c22f7e7be5837747428e6f2ca4ee47@collyer.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] strangely typed functions in standard library
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 22:03:05 -0700
From: geoff@collyer.net
In-Reply-To: <6b8e7586eaf104fda388c17f4e43391b@quanstro.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 51edf0aa-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I feel that the Unicode consortium bungled the job.  People warned
them from the outset that 16 bits was a largish space, but still
finite.  Once Han unification was done, the Unicode people felt that
they had all the room in the world, and assigned generous portions of
the space to each alphabet.  Others warned them that they should be
more conservative in their allocations, but were waved off.

It may be that 16 bits are not enough to express all the necessary
characters in the world, but I don't think that the Unicode consortium
have proven that case.