Anonymous user
Talk:Unicode strings: Difference between revisions
→New task description
Line 46:
:I preferred the chatty, inclusive, original. This is an English website, but I happen to agree with Ledrug and the original text. It seems that many native English speaking programmers need to be goaded into thinking about Unicode, and the tone of the original was more likely to involve the reader, IM'''H'''O. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 10:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
:: Maybe we could link to a separate article on the pros and cons of Unicode, but I don't think that is really required. I think we should be brief and precise and stick to the task. We could create a separate article about Unicode, which covers the pros and cons. The original unnecessay verbage was not chatty, tt was one sided and did not state drawbacks. However, I don't think such an article is really necessary here. It does not affect the implementation of the task in any way. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 19:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
::: What "implementation"? You still don't get it. It's ''not'' a coding task. Let me say it again, it's '''not''' a coding task. It's a place where people can share their knowledge with others who are not familiar with a specific language. And I did say Unocode is complex, what more drawbacks do you need? Please stop trying to force everyone to agree with your narrow-minded point of view, and ''do'' discuss on talk page before you go around and change descriptions according to your feelings alone. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 20:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||