Oh no, not Unicode again

[john roberts]

on 3/1/03 9:30 AM, Ruslan Zasukhin at sunshine at public.kherson.ua wrote:

> -- Classic still important ?
> or Carbon is enough ?
> classic can do Unicode work ?
> 
Both. You want the databases to be usable regardless of where they were
created or "who" created them.
> 
> -- show we have the same and only
> String and VarChar fields

Sounds good.
> 
> with addition of 'encoding' parameter?
> although this way looks to be hard for UTF16
> 
What about UTF8 ? I would hope that the encoding parameter would allow for
any encoding.
> 
> -- or we should get new 2 fields
> 
> UString
> UVarChar

This would certainly make it easier to use (or not use) encodings. However,
I think it would reduce portability.
> 
> how other dbs do this ?

Not sure others are on board yet.

John Roberts