Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 06/01/2014 05:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I did a little bit of experimentation and determined that none of the
>> LATIN1 characters are significantly more portable than what we've got:
>> for instance a-acute fails to convert into 16 of the 33 supported
>> server-side encodings (versus 17 failures for U+0080). However,
>> non-breaking space is significantly better: it converts into all our
>> supported server encodings except EUC_CN, EUC_JP, EUC_KR, EUC_TW.
>> It seems likely that we won't do better than that except with a basic
>> ASCII character.
> Yeah, I just looked at the copyright symbol, with similar results.
I'd been hopeful about that one too, but nope :-(
> Let's just stick to ASCII.
The more I think about it, the more I think that using a plain-ASCII
character would defeat most of the purpose of the test. Non-breaking
space seems like the best bet here, not least because it has several
different representations among the encodings we support.
regards, tom lane
