W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Reviewed charmod fundamentals

From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:35:48 -0500
Message-Id: <p06010210bc726cd118bd@[192.168.254.4]>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>

At 10:09 AM -0800 3/8/04, Tim Bray wrote:

>I don't think charmod should have a SHOULD in favor either of 
>single-encoding or UTF-8/16.  I think it should point out that each 
>alternative is a good choice in lots of situations. -Tim
>
>

Given that "All XML processors MUST accept the UTF-8 and UTF-16 
encodings of  Unicode" (XML 1.1 spec, section 2.2) I can't quite see 
the reason why any protocol would choose to forbid either of these. 
Let people work with whichever one seems most convenient to them 
locally.
-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   elharo@metalab.unc.edu
   Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml            
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA 
Received on Monday, 8 March 2004 14:11:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:25 GMT