[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML Blueberry
- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:04:17 -0400
Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> It almost feels to me like those tables should be the responsibility of
> the Unicode folks (or some similarly lucky but separate intermediary
> with time on its hands) to maintain, and that some means of
> incorporating them by reference might have avoided this entire
> discussion.
In essence they are: Unicode sets the character properties, and
XML has rules saying which types of characters can be used for what,
and what the exceptions are.
> I guess that would make the layering of XML 1.0 on top of Unicode more
> explicit.
The trouble is stability vs. extensibility. XML 1.0 has remained stable
since 1998 at the expense of extensibility.
--
There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein