Re: True quotes

David Perrell (davidp@earthlink.net)
Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:02:36 -0700


Message-ID: <01BB74BA.2AD594C0@max1-ag-ca-26.earthlink.net>
From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: True quotes
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:02:36 -0700

 Walter Ian Kaye wrote:

> Eventually you'll be able to use the Unicode equivalents (which you can find
> at <http://www.natural-innovations.com/boo/doc-charset.html>)

According to my ISO tables, the table at this address is incorrect. It lists 
#96 as an acute. According the ISO table in the PostScript reference manual, 
#96 is quoteleft. According the ISO8859-1 table at 
<http://www.sandia.gov/sci_compute/iso_symbol.html>, #96 is "grave accent-
back apostrophe" (not the same, are they?). Acute accent is #180 in both 
tables. In the ASCII table at 
<http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Wilbur/latin1.gif>, #96 appears to be 
quoteleft.

From whence came the ISO8859-1 and why are so many standard typographical 
entities missing? What's the dif between the ISO numbers in the Adobe PS 
manual and ISO8859-1? (The PS manual shows grave accent as the no-no number 
145. Why 32 no-no numbers?). Why wait for Unicode? There are named entities 
for other characters not in ISO8859-1 -- why not for typographical quote 
marks?

I vaguely remember a proposal for a quote tag. This strikes me as a good idea. Text can have <Q>true</Q> opening and closing quotes.

> use...one of Netscape's supported charsets....
> ...you'd have to require Netscape for accurate rendering.

No less evil than &#147;codes like that&#148;.

David Perrell
(a peripheral character in "Web Standards," by Franz Kafka)