- From: Christopher R. Maden <crm@ebt.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 18:05:55 GMT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Murray Maloney explained the history of the Symbol-font entities, ending with: > So, I unashemedly agree with Jon's request. An XML application > should and must be capable of faithfully processing a well-defined > and agreed set of named character entities, even in the absence of > declarations for those named character entities. And while I would > prefer that this set be as comprehensive as possible, I submit that > the minimum set that is supportable with "very little effort" is the > set which includes all of the ASCII set (dec 32-126), all of the > 8859-1 set (dec 158?-255), and those characters from the Adobe > Symbol set that have corresponding names among the ISO list of named > character entities. I don't have a problem with defaulted entity names. But if I want to redefine an entity, I'd better bloody well be able to, or I'm going to be quite peeved. It's quite possible that this will make downconversion from SGML untenable for some potential users. -Chris -- <!NOTATION SGML.Geek PUBLIC "-//GCA//NOTATION SGML Geek//EN"> <!ENTITY crism PUBLIC "-//EBT//NONSGML Christopher R. Maden//EN" SYSTEM "<URL>http://www.ebt.com <TEL>+1.401.421.9550 <FAX>+1.401.521.2030 <USMAIL>One Richmond Square, Providence, RI 02906 USA" NDATA SGML.Geek>
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 1996 13:16:23 UTC