Anonymous user
Talk:Unicode strings: Difference between revisions
m
I am sure that it must be possible to demonstrate handling of UTF16.
(→The task description change: the problem is they were *not* requirements) |
m (I am sure that it must be possible to demonstrate handling of UTF16.) |
||
Line 15:
Where is the problem? [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 17:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
:Originally they were preceded by "some example considerations:", which makes a big difference--they were not task requirements, just some suggestions of what to say. And some of these can be talked about, but difficult to ''demonstrate''. How are you going to ''demonstrate'' your language can handle UTF-16 when the web page is encoded in UTF-8? Again, this is a very big and important topic, so people should be allowed to talk about what they think is most important. It helps to gather key points here, instead of forcing readers to go to one page for keywords, another for variable names, etc. And at least, ''discuss'' about intended changes before you just go and do it: apparently I am not alone in disliking the changes. I'd like to hear some more opinions on this, and if not many people support the changes, I'll revert it later. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 17:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
::Ok, I have made the demonstrations optional. I am sure that it must be possible to demonstrate handling of UTF16. Just a quick search through google, and it appears to be done on other websites ok. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 18:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||