[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
> John, could you clarify what this "now or never" is about?
>
> While I support what XML 1.1 is trying to do, I have a really hard time
> seeing anything "now or never" about it. If there's no great rush to
> implement, I'm not sure why there's a great rush to standardize. James'
> experience hardly seems unusual.
The irony, arguably, is that having set themselves the lofty goal of making
XML independent of any version of Unicode, with the aim of letting XML
track Unicode versions, if normalization is removed then the W3C XML
Core WG is actually *tieing* XML to older versions of Unicode!
One good argument against text normalization is that the APIs just don't
exist. (Putting ICU aside, and waiting like a bride at the altar for Java 1.5)
However, the normalization APIs don't exist because the libraries are
based on Unicode circa version 3.0. So saying we cannot have text
normalization because the libraries don't exist is really tieing us to
obsolescent Unicode versions.
The real solution may be for the XML Core WG to make it really
explicit that becoming Unicode-neutral or -independent or whatever
does not preclude them from issuing corrections to XML to cope
with emerging technologies in Unicode and changes in the state-of-the-art
of deployed systems that make technologies in Unicode reachable.
I really don't want to see the XML Core WG straightjacket themselves.
Being able to exclude bits of current Unicode because the 2001-deployed generation
of APIs does not cope with it, in the name of future-proofing XML is odd, ne?
Cheers
Rick Jelliffe
|
