- From: Albert Lunde <Albert-Lunde@northwestern.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 19:24:57 CST
- To: www-html@w3.org
> > On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Tim Bagot wrote: > > > This is incorrect. Numeric character references refer to ISO 10646 (which > > conveniently corresponds to ISO 8859-1 for the first 256 characters) > > whatever the document's character encoding, and have done since at least > > HTML 2.0. Some browsers were (are?) somewhat broken in this respect, but I > > would be very surprised indeed by the existence of one that broke on ASCII > > characters. > > Actually, Numeric character references refering to ISO 10646 only began > with HTML 4.0. But who's counting. > > For HTML 2.0, and HTML 3.2, the first 128 characters (0-127) refered to > ISO 646, and the last 128 characters (128-255) refered to ECMA-94 Right > Part of Latin Alphabet Nr. 1. ... Well something like that. There's some not-too-obvious language in the HTML 2.0 spec that basically tries to say: if you are going to go beyond ISO 8859-1, use ISO 10646 for numeric character references. (Read the notes.) Also note the RFC on internationalization of HTML; the handwriting was on the wall well before the HTML 4.0 spec came out. -- Albert Lunde Albert-Lunde@northwestern.edu (new address) Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (old address)
Received on Thursday, 25 January 2001 20:24:59 UTC