<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Meir Kriheli <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mkriheli@gmail.com">mkriheli@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div><div class="h5"><br></div></div>Nitpick: It's actually ucs2/ucs4 (which preceded the above but are compatible).<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Double nitpick, UTF-16 and UCS-2 are identical representation, and it's better to always use the name UTF-16 as the FAQ <a href="http://www.unicode.org/faq/basic_q.html#14">says</a>:</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
UCS-2 is obsolete terminology which refers to a Unicode implementation up to Unicode 1.1, before surrogate code points and UTF-16 were added to Version 2.0 of the standard. <b>This term should now be avoided.</b></blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>So I think it's perfectly reasonable to call the internal representation UTF-16.</div><div>(And since python offer some support for surrogate pairs, at least in string literals, it might even make sense to call it UTF-16).</div>
<div><br></div><div>(Sorry, I couldn't help it ;-)</div></div></div>