[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Michael Rys wrote:
> the proposal was to change the role of character entitization.
Sorry I wasn't clear. I was in fact following the thread, and I did infer that
it was a proposal, hence my statement:
> > FWIW, I am strongly against changing the definition of a character
> > reference in order to make "�" allowable.
I think the solution should not have to involve changing the semantics or the
level of abstraction at which a character reference operates. They should not
tread some middle ground between the fairly discrete levels of abstraction
(between characters, code points, encodings) that have been established in XML
1.0 and that are, IMHO, not crying out to be broken just to make it easier for
XML to carry binary payloads.
- Mike
____________________________________________________________________________
mike j. brown | xml/xslt: http://skew.org/xml/
denver/boulder, colorado, usa | resume: http://skew.org/~mike/resume/
|
