Re: Unicode-capable software

Way back when, I wrote: > The fact that the other RDBMSes still don't properly support Unicode > is a major disgrace. Interbase and Oracle's recent versions only > support UTF-8. Illustra did have Unicode support, but its new owner > Informix doesn't. MS and Sybase SQL Server don't. IBM's DB2 doesn't > and seems to have only one employee (in Toronto) who even cares > about > this.. (So much for the pretenses of the "Universal Server" > databases.) On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 19:00:30 -0500, Tim Schaefer <tschaefe@mindspring.com> replied: >Excuse my ignorance, but, >Why is unicode support important to you??? >This is a point of education for me. It provides a single, consistent encoding for all the world's alphabets, syllabaries, and logographs, doing away with the need for code pages. It is especially useful for people working with Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, and other non-European writing systems. I need it for Chinese because the best alternative, the "Big5" encoding, is missing about 6,000 characters that are present in Unicode. (posted and emailed) --- Richard A. Schulman // For email reply, be sure to remove the two anti-spamming // asterisks that will appear in the "to" field of your reply.