[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:08:43 -0800
Tim Bray wrote:
> >
> The UTF-*'s are logically equivalent to most users, in that they share
> the property that almost no real-world data objects are encoded in either.
Quite true, from what I know, if you don't consider all the documents
encoded in ASCII (which is a subset of UTF-8). Many of them aren't
tagged as to encoding; assert they're UTF-8 not ASCII, and disproof is
often going to be impossible!
Worth noting however is that the IETF recognized a policy last year to push
the use of UTF-8 in new protocols. Other registered encodings are fine,
but UTF-8 support is mandatory. See http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2277.txt
for a few more details; it's "best current practices" on the Internet.
- Dave
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
