Re: Your comments on the Character Model [C130, C131]

Wow, this has been on the back burner for a loooong while, time to try
to get closure.

Steven Pemberton wrote:
 >Exactly! That's the whole point. The problem in my experience is that
 >people don't understand whether they are encoding characters in an NCR
 >in Unicode or the transmission character set.

I agree with your expression of "the problem", but it's one problem, not
the only one.  In the context of your request for an example of
transcoding however, it's not only not the whole point, but not the
point at all.  Transcoding does not deal with NCRs, period.  NCRs are
addressed in section 3.7.  If there's something unsatisfactory there, we
can adress it, but let's please not add to the confusion by conflating
NCRs and transcoding.

 >In fact, it's even worse: some think that if you indicate an encoding
 >that the UA processes the document in that encoding. The very day that
 >I sent my example in, I had had someone in my office asking me to
 >explain it, and the example I sent was the one I had used to explain.

How documents are (or should be!) processed is addressed by section 3.5 
Reference Processing Model.  This makes it clear that the UA does not 
process the document in the encoding it is received, but in Unicode (or 
at least behaves as if it did that).  Perhaps if the person from your 
office had read that, things would have been clearer.  If not, 
suggestions for clarification would be welcome.

Regards,

-- 
François Yergeau

Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2004 16:17:26 UTC