It would be fine if you could escape them; after all, nobody does expect the
raw codes to work. However, you can't use the normal escapes to encode them,
e.g. 
Mark
—————
πάντων μέτρον ἄνθρωπος — Πρωταγόρας
[http://www.macchiato.com]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ayers, Mike" <Mike_Ayers@bmc.com>
To: <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 12:21
Subject: RE: Is there Unicode mail out there?
>
> > From: Shigemichi Yazawa [mailto:yazawa@globalsight.com]
>
> > > From: "Bill Kurmey" <Bill.Kurmey@v-wave.com>
>
> > > > My concern stems from working with an email archive
> > format which uses soh,
> > > > stx and etx as an envelope.
> >
> > Good point. U+000c is also used frequently in email's and news
> > article's body. It may not make sense to allow control characters in
> > HTML, but it does make sense in XML when it is used as a container of
> > data including legacy data like email archives.
>
> So why not used tagged data to represent C0 and C1 characters? That
> is what XML is made of. As far as why control characters are not
permitted,
> it seems to ma that this is so that XML documents can be passed around
> easily, through HTTP, email, FTP and so on, without loss of data.
Protocols
> abound which interpret control characters, so XML files which contain data
> may get mangled or may mangle the systems which pass them. However, if
that
> data is included as tagged hex digits, no problem will occur either way.
>
> The UTC folks may wish to consider contacting the XML Blueberry
> folks about getting the XML character repertoire cleaned up in that
project.
>
>
> /|/|ike
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 18 2001 - 17:50:50 EDT