Representing Unix filenames in Unicode (original) (raw)

Next message: Hans Aberg: "Re: Representing Unix filenames in Unicode"

On 28 Nov 2005, at 06:58, Doug Ewell wrote:

>> Most facts points to that the Unicode/10646 is a human interface,
>> not a computer to computer to computer interface.
>
> I wonder what on earth that means.

Do you mean the typo (the erroneously extra "to computer")?
Otherwise, it just means that computers works best with handling low
structured binary data, whereas for humans it is the opposite,
usually handling thinking in terms of high level structures, not even
binary in nature. If computers should just communicate among
themselves, as in done in the low level on a filesystem, they do not
have any benefit of knowing that the filenames can be given human
interpretation, as is done with the Unicode/10646 character set. Right?

Hans Aberg

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5: Mon Nov 28 2005 - 01:37:16 CST