Search Results
Search type | Search syntax |
---|---|
Tags | [tag] |
Exact | "words here" |
Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
Views | views:250 |
Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
URL | url:"*.example.com" |
Saves | in:saves |
Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
Types |
is:question is:answer |
Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
For more details on advanced search visit our help page |
The Universal Character Set (Unicode, ISO 10646): standardisation history, early adopters and conversion between it and retro character sets.
3
votes
Could we have avoided the whole UTF-16 fiasco?
Much of what's in Unicode could as well, and would likely be much better encoded, by metadata/markup. … Unicode (necessarily, being forced) partially did go that route with e.g. the LRM/RLM markers. …