On 6/19/18, 11:10 AM, "unicode-bounces_at_[hidden]g on behalf of Lyberta" <unicode-bounces_at_open-std.org on behalf of lyberta_at_lyberta.net> wrote:

Mark Zeren:
> [mjz] This is one approach. Another is Zach's opinionated "there is only one storage container" approach.

Zach's approach is exactly what I don't want to see in the standard. His
type only supports UTF-8.

[mjz] Completely understood. I'm making the rhetorical point that there are other positions. Most (all?) "competing" language runtimes have chosen "one true string storage class". Even with the current standard libaray C++ std::string (the particular instantiation) is a defacto vocabulary type, and other instantiations are vanishingly rare. Again, this is partly rhetorical, but also you never know these things until you start debating and polling.