Re: Status report: regex replacement

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: hannu(at)tm(dot)ee
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Status report: regex replacement
Date: 2003-02-07 02:03:13
Message-ID: 20030207.110313.74751276.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Right. Also we perhaps should call LATIN1 or ISO-8859-1 more precisely
> > way since ISO-8859-1 can be encoded in either 7 bit or 8 bit(we use
> > this). I don't know what it is called though.
>
> I don't think that calling 8-bit ISO-8859-1 ISO-8859-1 can confuse
> anybody, but UCS-2 (ISO-10646-1), UTF-8 and UTF-16 are all widely used.

I just pointed out that ISO-8859-1 is *not* an encoding, but a
character set.

> UTF-8 seems to be the most popular, but even XML standard requires all
> compliant implementations to deal with at least both UTF-8 and UTF-16.

I don't think PostgreSQL is going to natively support UTF-16.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tim Allen 2003-02-07 02:18:44 Re: Status report: regex replacement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-02-06 18:45:11 Why is lc_messages restricted?