Re: SDATA, again
| When the ERB decided not to include SDATA entities in XML 1.0, it
| placed the topic of non-Unicode characters, glyph identification,
| and documenting (or making) private agreements for character-set
| handling on the list of problems to be addressed in future revisions.
| I think Jon meant simply that a fully worked out proposal is not our
| prime business, and could usefully be addressed elsewhere. I hope
Perhaps, but what he said is that it's ANSI's business, and the
existing Unicode spec does not inspire confidence that they consider
| the SGML Open group Lee Quin is heading will give us something good
| to work from or adopt. The TEI is another place where discussions of
| this type might find a home, in the guise of discussing whether and
| how to revise the TEI Writing System Declaration.
| I would have no objection to adding a sentence to the spec to observe
| that using the private use area successfully requires out-of-band
| agreements between sender and recipient of files, or between user and
| software. But I thought that was pretty much clear from the start.
Only if you have read the Unicode spec; the (ahem) naive reader of
XML will assume that some mechanism already exists.
| I also have no objection to publishing, as a separate document, the list
| of topics we said we want to come back to in version 1.n or 2.0, though
| I don't think time-dependent information like that belongs in a
Surely a list of what is deferred to future consideration is appropriate?
It's not properly time-dependent but version-dependent (except in
the sense that all things are time-dependent). But so far as I
can see, this is the only point on which I'd like such a comment.
| >And if it is truly contemplated that the private use area (rather than
| >SDATA entities) are to be used for the purpose under discussion, doesn't
| >the EBNF need to reflect that?
| I believe it does -- unless you mean that you think the characters in
| the private-use area should be allowed in generic identifiers. The
| EBNF doesn't reflect that, because I believe there is some consensus
| that private-use characters should be data, not markup.
I'm tempted to ask, which private-use characters? But won't.
Terry Allen Fujitsu Software Corp. firstname.lastname@example.org
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
A Davenport Group Sponsor: http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html