Chris Lilley wrote: > In the XML instance, this may be accomplished by having them appear as > themselves (unless you deliberately chose a less portable and less > comprehensive encoding than the two universally understood ones and > declared it as such in the xml encoding declaration in which case, ask > yourself again what you did that for) or via NCRs. I write XML in ISO-8859 all the time. Furthermore, the original source code of the XML 1.0 specification was in ISO-8859-1. For me, ISO-8859-1 is culturally appropriate and storage-efficient. 'Ongoing' is written in pure ASCII, (which, left undeclared, pretends to be UTF-8). 'Ongoing' makes regular use of non-ASCII characters, this is made easy by XML's entity & NCR mechanism. XML is explicitly designed to allow people to use the encodings that are appropriate for them, and there's good support for this in deployed software. -- Cheers, Tim Bray (ongoing fragmented essay: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/)Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 18:29:44 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 September 2008 07:01:57 GMT