From: Tex Texin (tex@i18nguy.com)
Date: Sat Nov 02 2002 - 21:17:02 EST
Doug,
Doug Ewell wrote:
>
> Tex Texin <tex at i18nguy dot com> wrote:
>
> > However, I didn't realize that parsers were to allow for the
> > possibility of different signatures.
> > So a parser has to worry about scsu signatures, etc....
>
> A parser only *has* to read UTF-8 without signature and UTF-16 with
> signature.
Yes, I thought so until I saw Michka's note. And I thought that gave me
100% utf-8 coverage.
Apparently I would be leaving out the thousands ;-) that edit xml with
notepad.
It *may* read other encodings of its own choosing, including
> ISO 8859-1, SCSU, JOECODE, or US-BSCII. (However, I can't find anything
> that allows for SCSU with signature, which is a shame since UTS #6
> encourages the signature.)
Can I stand on the other side of the fence now and refer to market
forces when it comes to ISO 8859 etc. ? ;-)
Anyway, I think you understood the context of my whines-- It was just
reaction to this silliness with open-ended signatures...
tex
-- ------------------------------------------------------------- Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@XenCraft.com Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com Making e-Business Work Around the World -------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 21:45:55 EST