> > Storing everything as Unicode is not a good idea, actually. First,
> > Unicode tends to consume more storage space than other character
> > sets. For example, UTF-8, one of the most commonly used encoding for
> > Unicode consumes 3 bytes for Japanese characters, while SJIS only
> > consumes 2 bytes. Second, a round trip converison between Unicode and
> > other character sets is not always possible. Third, sorting
> > issue. There is no convenient way to sort Unicode correctly.
>
> UTF-16 can handle most Japanese characters in two bytes, afaict. Generally
> it seems that utf8 encodes European text more efficiently on average,
> whereas utf16 is better for most Asian languages.
Same thing can be said to UCS-2. Most multibyte characters could be
two bytes within UCS-2. The problem with both UTF-16 and UCS-4 is that
data may contain NULL bytes.
> I may be mistaken, but I
> was under the impression that sorting of unicode characters was a solved
> problem. The IBM ICU class library (which does have a C interface), for
> example, claims to provide everything you need to sort unicode text in
> various locales, and uses utf16 internally:
Interesting. Thanks for the info. I will look into this.
BTW, "round trip conversion problem" still need to be addressed.
--
Tatsuo Ishii