- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@topologi.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 13:04:20 +1000
- To: "Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-blueberry-comments@w3.org>
For Paul Grosso > So that we can track all these issues, I've been tasked > to ask you to be sure to send all XML 1.1 issues to the > blueberry comments list [2]. > We do plan to include all your issues in our discussions, > and we are currently consulting with I18N and others for > more input on the issues you are raising. Thanks for that Paul. However, when I then raised the issue of robustness http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-blueberry-comments/2002Feb/0075.html it never made it into the comments list, either. Similarly, the text/html issue is still not on the Core WG's comments list, after two months. Robustness, just like normalization, is something that ASCII and (to some extent) ISO 8859-1 developers have the luxury of ignoring. But the fact that normalization and checking for corrupt encoding is not a part of the experience and culture of most, presumably, of the programmers on the Core WG cannot be a reason to assume it is not important. In the case of normalization, the Core WG should be aware that there is a Thai industrial standard for normalizing Thai combining character sequences into good order, for example. It is a basic requirement for computing there, I was told many years ago. (Presumably James Clark would have better contact with the current status.) Indeed, it is because encoding-error-detection and normalization surprize and perplex inexperienced programmers that they need to be put into the core standards, so that developers using XML can be shielded from having to do it themselves: the appalling and slow internationalization of open sourced software shows that when left to themselves, developers are extremely averse to venturing beyond their competence. That is prudent for a developer; however prudence for a standards-maker is to err on the side of outside expertise when dealing with matters beyond their particular experience. The good level of internationalization of XML is frequently, and almost constantly mentioned as one of the reasons why bodies select XML, as inumerable web pages can attest. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
Received on Saturday, 13 April 2002 00:28:27 UTC