Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 2009-03-17 at 20:39:50 [+0100], François Revol <revol@xxxxxxx> > wrote: > > IMO we should support a B_UTF8_CONVERSION, rename > > B_UNICODE_CONVERSION > > to B_UCS2_CONVERSION or whichever, to avoid misunderstanding, > Sounds reasonable. [...] > > allowing the use of convert_ to also validate or eventually correct > > broken strings by converting them from ISO latin1 as fallback > > (seems > > ZETA's one does it when it finds broken UTF-8 as input). > Not sure about this. Reporting an error and letting the caller decide > what > other encoding to try sounds better to me than hardcoding anything. > Alternatively (or additionally) "lenient"/"do what you can" versions > of the > conversion functions could be added. Completely agreed. Bye, Axel.