Anonymous user
Talk:Unicode strings: Difference between revisions
m
We could merge the Unicode tasks into one task
m (I am sure that it must be possible to demonstrate handling of UTF16.) |
m (We could merge the Unicode tasks into one task) |
||
Line 16:
: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)
:::We could merge the Unicode tasks into one task called Unicode, or maybe we could create a parent task that links to these subtasks. I had the reverse problem on a task that I had written. I tried to gather information points in one place, and people wanted it breaking down. There are probably pros and cons to both methods. I think they should be kept separate, but grouped together under a category "Unicode". [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 18:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||