Lists Home |
Date Index |
> It is unnatural to allow #85 as white space in XML as (currently at least)
> isn't as far as I know an end of line character in any ascii/unicode based
> So it is completely unlike the situation with #10 and #13.
Ummm, the Unicode consortium has supplied an entire technical report
http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr13/ on this fascinating subject.
The first sentence says "Newlines are represented on different platforms by
carriage return (CR), line feed (LF), CRLF, or next line (NEL)." That
implies to me that #85 is completely IDENTICAL to the situation with #10 and
#13 in Unicode.
I'm pretty sure that some of you arguing against XML treating NEL as a line
separator have made the "it's a done deal, learn to live with it" argument
when various people on this list have whined about the more bizarre bits of
XML syntax, the W3C schema spec, etc. etc. etc. If XML is to be taken
seriously as a cross-platform standard, it's gonna have to eat the
cross-platform standards dogfood... or at least come up with a more
compelling argument than "it's unnatural" or "that's not the way it works on
I don't like the flavor of this dogfood any more than anyone else here, but
the Unicode folks have provided a lifetime supply. I guess XML had better
learn to stomach it if XML wants to eat at Unicode's table.