This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. <hi>(needhelp)<hi/>

My edit was just reverted. I'm going to put it back but change "the common case" to "many code points".

The introduction of the article needs a simple explanation of the concept that is understandable without background knowledge and giving "character" as an example provides a good intuition. -- Liiiii (talk) 14:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

The ASCII example is unsuitable since ASCII does not used the code point/encoding distinction. It should be replaced be something else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liiiii (talk • contribs) 08:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

True, it doesn't use the code point/encoding distinction but that isn't critical to the description of the concept of "code points". Codepoints are espcially handy for systems like Unicode that have multiple encodings, but codepoints do exist in system that only use one encoding.

(Informally, in fact there are multiple ASCII encodings - there's 6 bit ASCII, 7 bit ASCII with even, odd, and no parity, extended 8-bit ASCII, etc. Even UTF-8 can be considered to be an extended form of ASCII.) Dave92F1 (talk) 00:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

The concept of codepoints (or code points) long predates Unicode (and ASCII) and is much more general than characters. This article makes it sound like it's a concept from Unicode.

In fact a codepoint is a unique point in a quantized n-dimensional space, which is assigned a semantic meaning.

In other words, it's a table entry that has been filled in with something. The table has discrete positions (1, 2, 3, 4, but not fractions) and may be one dimensional (a column), two dimensional (like cells in a spreadsheet), three dimensional (sheets in a workbook), etc... in any number of dimensions.

It is used to convey meanings. ASCII is uses a simple 1D codepoint table - 0x20 is a space, 0x41 is 'A', etc.

But the concept is used in a multitude of formal information processing standards, in which codepoints are assigned meanings. For example ITU-T Recommendion T.35 (https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-T.35-200002-I/en) is a set of country codes for fax machines (and other things). Each country is assigned a codepoint, so that when a fax machine calls, it can identify which country it's calling from. Argentina is 0x03, Canada is 0x20, Gambia is 0x41, etc.

These are codepoints. They have nothing to do with character encoding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave92F1 (talk • contribs) 02:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Agree. We should distinguish the use of term code point for both character and objects associations. Do we have proper sources covering this difference btw? AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 10:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

This page is quite confusing and claims the Unicode standard does not explain the difference between abstract characters and codepoints, yet it does so much more clearly than this article, which confusingly brings up codepages when discussing Unicode:

The distinction between a code point and the corresponding abstract character is not pronounced in Unicode, but is evident for many other encoding schemes, where numerous code pages may exist for a single code space.

The statement above is especially confusing as code pages both define a code space and a mapping for code points to abstract characters.

The clear explanation can be found here "Unicode Standard 8.0.0., 2.4 Code Points and Characters": http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/UnicodeStandard-8.0.pdf#G7.25564 78.124.136.51 (talk) 06:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply