[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 09:19:32 -0800, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
> Fair enough, but if you remove all the unicode-character apparatus from
> XML 1.0 you probably cut that in half. Which is one of the only
> important *technical* differences between XML and SGML - SGML was really
> underspecified on what a "character" was. At the end of the day XML's
> main technical contribution may turn out to have been that it dragged
> Unicode into the mainstream.
Stupid question: Why couldn't XML incorporate Unicode by reference rather
than spending half of the spec defining the "unicode-character apparatus"?
|
