W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-blueberry-comments@w3.org > June 2001

Re: XML Blueberry

From: Rob Lugt <roblugt@elcel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 14:43:44 +0100
Message-ID: <044b01c0fb21$5b150290$0400a8c0@scott>
To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, "David Carlisle" <davidc@nag.co.uk>, <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Cc: <www-xml-blueberry-comments@w3.org>
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote
> >If all the files using NEL start
> ><?xml version="1.0" encoding="some-flavour-of-ebcdic"?>
> >Then can't NEL be mapped to #10 (0r #13) in the non normative support
> >for the ebcdic related encodings. This wouldn't require any change to
XML.
> >
>
> This is a good idea. Maybe we can fix this part of the problem in the
> context of XML 1.0 without changing the spec. We'd need to define a
> new encoding of Unicode such as IBD-8. IBD-8 would be identical to
> UTF-8 except that normal UTF-8 representation of the NEL character
> would be mapped to the linefeed.
> <snip/>
> And of course if UTF-8 isn't the variant that IBM wants, they can
> have IBD-16 (UTF-16), IBD4 (UCS4) etc. The encodings would be
> identical except that XML-aware tools would either translate the NEL
> characters to linefeeds or throw an error because they don't
> recognize the encoding. I think this might make everyone happy. Does
> anyone see a problem with this?

Elliotte,

I think the good people at IANA [1] would treat this request with the scorn
which you have poured onto Blueberry.

Regards
~Rob

[1] http://www.iana.org/
Received on Friday, 22 June 2001 09:39:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 12:11:43 GMT