Lists Home |
Date Index |
Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>>Of course it's cunningly designed to look like an architectural change,
>>that allows such syntax as: <é/>
Yow. I hadn't thought of that. (Hmm, somehow I missed David's message;
xml-dev acting up again?)
> That is therefore an enormous processing model change. This is way
> beyond surrogates. The potential for further disruption on this
> precedent seems downright boundless.
Hmm, it's just an idiotically simple filter that replaces a bunch of
hardwired patterns with hardwired Unicode code points. Hardly feels
like a processing model change.
> I wrote a piece on XML as a disruptive technology a few years ago ,
> but I can't say I expected XML to drill into the Unicode layer and
> modify the very notion of a character encoding.
UTF-8+names doesn't depend on XML, I can think of other applications for
it. Anyhow Unicode character encodings in widespread use have been
cooked up by ANSI, ISO, JIS, and even Bell Labs (that's where UTF-8 came
from). The notion of inventing a new encoding to better serve
application needs is hardly radical. The bar to entry is that you have
to have a clear and transparent mapping to Unicode code points, which
Cheers, Tim Bray (http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/)