> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > > Force all translations to be in unicode and convert to other client
> > > encodings if needed. There is no need to support translations stored using
> > > different encodings.
> >
> > Tell that to the Japanese.
>
> I've always thought unicode was enough to even represent Japanese. Then
> the client encoding can be something else that we can convert to. In any
> way, the encoding of the message catalog has to be known to the system so
> it can be converted to the correct encoding for the client.
I'm tired of telling that Unicode is not that perfect. Another gottcha
with Unicode is the UTF-8 encoding (currently we use) consumes 3
bytes for each Kanji character, while other encodings consume only 2
bytes. IMO 3/2 storage ratio could not be neglected for database use.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
