When is ISCII better than UNICODE and vice versa

ISCII is great to store names(people/location etc) which do not vary across languages. Consider a 10 Million names database storing names of people which need to be picked up during reports across different languages. One row storage of ISCII can take care of the names and transliteration provided by  .Net encoding classes (similar effort can be applied to Unicode too but without lot of success) help display in various indic languages. In case Unicode encoding you will need to store a language specific name( this too could be useful if you are hell bent on correcting names/matras to suit local language) -thus multiplying storage cost.

The cost of storing ISCII is offset by need for translation into Unicode for display(IE is quite ahead in terms of display of unicode data with appropriate font)/capture (with help of INSCRIPT or local variant of phonetic or web based entry).

Indexing/sorting – language specific sorting can be different (Tamil is very different from other languages). A topic for another post alltogether.

When is ISCII better than UNICODE and vice versa

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s