RE: [xml-dev] [Summary] UTF-8 Question: e with acute accent should requ

["Alessandro Triglia" <sandro@mclink.it>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Tobin [mailto:richard@inf.ed.ac.uk] 
> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 06:07
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] [Summary] UTF-8 Question: e with acute 
> accent should require two bytes, right?
> 
> In article <006501c80214$2a2a5d00$8901a8c0@aldebaran> you write:
> 
> >> >It is not correct to say that a Unicode character can be 
> either an 
> >> >"ASCII character" or a "non-ASCII character".  It is better
> >> to say that
> >> >some Unicode characters (those with codes below 128) have a 
> >> >corresponding character in ASCII.
> 
> >> On what do you base this assertion?  Why do you think the ASCII 
> >> characters are not the same characters that appear in Unicode?
> 
> >That's not what I said nor what I think.
> 
> So if the ASCII characters *are* the same ones that appear in 
> Unicode, why is it not correct to say that Unicode characters 
> are either ASCII or non-ASCII characters?


I would object to the statement that some of the characters used, say, in
Italian or French or Hungarian are "ASCII characters" and some are not.  It
would be a funny statement to say that a certain sentence contains a mix of
ASCII and non-ASCII characters.  I would rather say that some of the
characters used in French are supported in ASCII and some are not, and
therefore some French words can be properly represented in ASCII but others
cannot.

Alessandro