Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Paul Prescod" <email@example.com>
> Now that Unicode gives English names to all characters, couldn't we say
> that all pre-Unicode names (SGML/ISO, XHTML/MatML/W3C, Docbook/OASIS
> etc.) are legacy names which over the long run could be replaced by
> entity names directly based upon Unicode names?
Because the names are too long for people to remember, and it would
probably require longer mapping tables. People say the short names
are too burdensome. The names would be prone to being line-broken.
> The Unicode name database is essentially open source and ships with some
> programming languages. Admittedly the names are verbose but short-forms
> are what internal entites are good for. For the occasional "funny"
> character I would actually prefer a long-but-verbose name to the
> short-but-cryptic ones SGML tradition prefers. When I need to use one
> over and over then I'll make an internal entity for it.
If internal entities are available! I doubt if people who have to type formulae
would find this very acceptable, but it is an option.
Not to give the impression that my opinion is very fixed on this.