Sorting it all Out Michael Kaplan's random stuff of dubious value Be sure to read the disclaimer here first!
When I was in my mid-20s, I lived in Columbus, Ohio. Living next door to me was a nice couple (Robert and Wendy) who were trying to start a family, and they were really having a tough time with it.
(I promise there is a point to this particular recollection!)
After a lot of effort and clinic visits and so forth (details are of course not relevant here), they finally managed it; she was pregnant.
Any time people asked Wendy "Are you having a boy or a girl?", something that was reportedly happening a lot, her answer was invariably "Yes, I hope so! Having a boy or a girl would be great!".
It has been many years since that time, but let me tell you that I think about Wendy and her answer any time someone asks me the question:
What version of Unicode does MS [Windows|.NET|SQL Server|Office|Bob] support?
I think that Wendy, if she is reading this right now, might be proud to hear my new answer to that eternal (or should I say infernal?) question:
The version released by The Unicode Consortium.
:-)
Because there really is no definitive answer to this very non-specific question. The answer always depends entirely on the [usually one] specific issue that the person asking is looking for the answer to. For example:
So the polite answer in the end is IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU MEAN. CAN YOU ELABORATE A BIT?
But for now, I am going to stick with my new answer.
Perhaps it is ornery.
But I think Wendy would want it this way.... :-)
This post brought to you by "𝍖" (U+1d356, a.k.a. TETRAGRAM FOR FOSTERING)
The other day, the question came in again. And when I say the question, I mean THE question. You know,
Is there a specific version of unicode which SQL Server 2000 complies to with regards to languages or unicode scripts?
I guess the better question is what languages are capable of being encoded in UCS-2 using SQL Server 2000. If the answer is not available, are you able to provide a list of Unicode scripts which are supported?
Thanks
You can STORE data of any version, even ones that don't exist yet. Beyond storage, it depends on the operation....
Sorry Blake, I accidentally deleted your reply (some overactive spam filtering). The part I managed to save:
"Thanks for the quick response. I'm interested in performing string manipulation, searching, ordering etc. on stored text data in Unicode. I understand that UCS-2 is used as the encoding which doesn't support surrogate pairs rather a subset of the full"
This is a common misconception. EVERY version of Unicode has supported the notion of not mucking with unassigned characters; from the standpoint of SQL Server, these are just things you can store. Now perhaps they aren't legal as identifiers and such. The data will be just fine in any Unicode column...
PingBack from http://www.hilpers.com/1217186-unicode-utf-8-a