Re: [xml-dev] MicroASCII proposal

["Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>]

April 1st seems like a good date to focus on for this as I would rather 
finish one task before starting another.  But building consensus on which 
subset of ASCII to use is the key bit, so that we can have THE MicroASCII 
format rather Yet Another MicroASCII format.

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Fuller" <MICHAEL.S.FULLER@saic.com>
To: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
Cc: "rjelliffe" <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] MicroASCII proposal


>
>
> I can't really see any value in rushing into this until, say, April
> at the earliest.  We really need to evolve a consensus first.
> Perhaps a draft RFC is appropriate? And a few robust implementations
> would certainly help...
>
> Michael
> -- 
> TeraText DBS Development, SAIC Pty Ltd.
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 09:44:44AM -0000, Pete Cordell wrote:
>> This is an interesting proposal Rick.  While I've no use for it myself,
>> I recognise that I don't represent every programmer, and if someone like
>> you finds it useful, there are likely to be many others that would also
>> find it useful.
> [...]
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "rjelliffe" <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
>> To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 7:36 AM
>> Subject: [xml-dev] MicroASCII proposal
>>
> [...]
>>> In order to do this, I am proposing MicroASCII. This would restore
>>> ASCII to its Latin essentials and reduce the insane repeats.
>>> Syntactical sugar such as K, Y and Z are no-brainers of course: I doubt
>>> that anyone will really miss them. But more recent fads such J, W and U
>>> are better off treated as presentation forms and taken care of by
>>> another layer: ASCII violates this basic separation of concerns.
>>> Indeed, the whole lower-case is redundant.
>>>
> [...]
>