Re: New invalid UTF-8 proposal using tags and %nn

I looked this up but it appears Perl is using "\x{NNNN}" as their 
version of what YAML is using "\uNNNN" for. It is not usable for 
producing an invalid encoding.

They are using the term UTF-X because they support both UTF-8 and 
UTF-EDBDIC.

The only "standards" I have seen for invalid UTF-8 is "\xNN" (from C, 
but incompatible with existing YAML), and "%nn" from URLs. I think I 
made a serious misstep in selling this idea originally by not following 
a standard and by proposing yet another escape sequence. I am now pretty 
convinced that some variation on %nn will work.

Josh ben Jore wrote:

> I do not know if this is indicative of any kind of standard BUT... Perl has
> an encoding called UTF-X which is a superset of UTF-8 plus all the invalid
> code points. That is, in Perl you can say "\x{FFFF}". You'll get a UTF-8
> marked string but if you feed it to something that actually checks for
> proper Unicode, it will be flagged as an error.
> 
> Perhaps you are wishing for Perl's UTF-X. Perhaps UTF-X has an an existence
> outside of Perl. In any case, it is not Unicode - it is larger than Unicode.
> 
> I mention this only to point out a possible implementation to steal ideas
> from.
> 
> Josh
> 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july