Talk:UTF-EBCDIC

UTF clarification request

"usually use UTF-16 for complete Unicode support."

But then it says it supports multibyte characters, so -- like UTF-8 -- wouldn't it support every Unicode character just with a different serialization?

Yes, it does. I don't think that "for" was intended to mean "because of". Although if you interpret "support" to mean the amount of software that recognizes the encoding, then UTF-16 does indeed have for more support than UTF-EBCDIC. DanBishop (talk) 08:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found this passage misleading too, and suggest something like "usually use UTF-16 to support Unicode." I'll make this change if nobody objects after some time. Doug Ewell 22:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DougEwell (talk • contribs)

Go ahead, but don't touch my UTF-5/6 note in the comparison ;-) –89.204.137.230 (talk) 21:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Red cells

What do the red cells in the table indicate? Illegal values? And why do they still distinguish between cells with a '2' or a '3'? The text doesn't answer these questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somejan (talk • contribs) 07:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ranges in tooltips

@Spitzak: At least four of these ranges don't make sense to me: U+0040—U+003F, U+0080—U+007F, U+00C0—U+00BF, and U+0100—U+00FF. I don't know if they're reversed but they are wrong. DRMcCreedy (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally started pasting my edits for UTF-8 into UTF-EBCDIC, this has been reverted now.Spitzak (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. DRMcCreedy (talk) 23:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]