Re: table 3-6. UTF-8 bit distribution
Giacomo Catenazzi via Unicode <[email protected]> Fri, 12 Sep 2025 08:59:46 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.unicode.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2025-09-11 22:58, Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via Unicode wrote: > Am 11.09.25 um 21:21 schrieb yitin--- via Unicode: >> https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode16.0.0/core-spec/chapter-3/#G27288 >> >> >> What is the significance of using different letters (x,y,z,u) >> for different bits? > > Significance? None. > This is simply to enhance the Readability: shows witch bits of the > encoding represent witch bits of the scalar value. Wikipedia uses a similar table, but using codepoint (so not showing "distribution", OTOH more consistent with next table). About the significance: Check the table above, and you see: for UTF-16 we need to specify groups (we need to subtract 1 in one group), so for consistency it is good to have the same notation also on UTF-8. About readability: I'm impressed that UTF-8 is fully described in two lines and two tables. Considering the complexities Note: nowhere we say about bit ordering, so the yyy xxx may help. If we want to be precise, (and now with new format and technologies [on real print may be ugly: or too small or too messy], it may be easier), we may but subscripts (0 to 19). My comment is just about "distribution". Is it really the best term to use? cate