Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?

From: John Cowan (cowan@mercury.ccil.org)
Date: Wed Jul 18 2001 - 00:02:47 EDT

Previous message: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
In reply to: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Next in thread: Mark Davis: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Next in thread: B: "FW: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: B: "FW: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: Ayers, Mike: "RE: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: Kenneth Whistler: "RE: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> I was just looking through the XML spec today, and the only non-characters
> excluded (other than the surrogates) are 0xFFFE and 0xFFFF.

Unfortunately, there's nothing we can do about it now, nor about the useless
C1 controls other than NEL. Shrinking the range of well-formed documents
is an immediate loser, even if there is no plausible use for such
documents.

Just pretend you'll never get one of the legal non-characters.

-- 
John Cowan                                   cowan@ccil.org
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
	--Douglas Hofstadter

Previous message: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
In reply to: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Next in thread: Mark Davis: "Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Next in thread: B: "FW: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: B: "FW: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: Ayers, Mike: "RE: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Maybe reply: Kenneth Whistler: "RE: Re: Is there Unicode mail out there?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 18 2001 - 01:01:49 EDT