Newbie question about text encoding

[Rustom Mody]

On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 10:25:24 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rustom Mody  wrote:
> >
> > It lists some examples of software that somehow break/goof going from BMP-only
> > unicode to 7.0 unicode.
> >
> > IOW the suggestion is that the the two-way classification
> > - ASCII
> > - Unicode
> >
> > is less useful and accurate than the 3-way
> >
> > - ASCII
> > - BMP
> > - Unicode
> 
> How is that more useful? Aside from storage optimizations (in which
> the significant breaks would be Latin-1, UCS-2, and UCS-4), the BMP is
> not significantly different from the rest of Unicode.

Sorry... Dont understand.
> 
> Also, the expansion from 16-bit was back in Unicode 2.0, not 7.0. Why
> do you keep talking about 7.0 as if it's a recent change?

It is 2015 as of now. 7.0 is the current standard.

The need for the adjective 'current' should be pondered upon.

In practice, standards change.
However if a standard changes so frequently that that users have to play catching cook
and keep asking: "Which version?" they are justified in asking "Are the standard-makers
doing due diligence?"