Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 or Unicode - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 or Unicode
Date
Msg-id 11919.1109786060@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 or Unicode  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 or Unicode  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> The correct encoding name is "UTF-8".

> True, but Peter says the ANSI standard calls it UTF8 so that's what I
> used.

What SQL99 actually says is

         -  UTF8 specifies the name of a character repertoire that consists
            of every character represented by The Unicode Standard Version
            2.0 and by ISO/IEC 10646 UTF-8, where each character is encoded
            using the UTF-8 encoding, occupying from 1 (one) through 6
            octets.

That is, "UTF8" is an identifier chosen to refer to an encoding which
they know perfectly well is really called UTF-8.  We should probably
follow the same convention of using UTF8 in code identifiers and UTF-8
in documentation.  In particular, UTF_8 with an underscore is sanctioned
by nobody and should be avoided.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Mark Wong
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: buffer manager rewrite (take 2)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] snprintf causes regression