[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Yeah, but that's nothing compared to what we have planned
for the spec editors.
len
From: Elliotte Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
Robin Berjon wrote:
> Of all people *we* should know that the encoding of text on a global
> scale is not a static science, it evolves and needs to evolve as Unicode
> improves. Yes this implies a phase during which XML processors may lose
> some interoperability, but whoever puts XML interoperability above human
> language operability needs to have their priorities seriously revised.
> Yes this may break software that is making stupid assumptions about the
> content of certain tokens, but such software was written based on a
> misunderstanding of text and deserves to break (and then to be shot in
> the kneecaps, tied to a horse and dragged all around town, dipped in
> boiling lead, dismembered piece by piece with a rusty spoon, and finally
> dumped in a ditch to agonize).
That's a pretty harsh punishment for actually implementing the specs as
written.
|
