[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Extenders (BNF rule 89)

• From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 13:29:46 -0400 (EDT)

Blunderingly I wrote:

> I have been investigating the class of Extenders with a view to a
> second part to my XML/Unicoded-3.0 proposal.  I find that three
> characters which Unicode classifies as extenders were mysteriously
> omitted from the XML category:

Please ignore this whole posting: it was the result of a bug in my
investigative scripts.

The upshot is that I have now looked at the Unicode 3.0 property
lists, and they don't add anything new.  My previous proposal stands.
However, the rationale for the fifth rule in Appendix B has now
gone away, and these characters should be treated as backward-compatibility
exceptions: they are of type Lm but are considered name-start characters.

-- 
John Cowan                                   cowan@c...
       I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: Re: CNET on XHTML
• Next by Date: ANN: Oracle XML Parser for Java v2.0.2 - Production Release
• Previous by thread: Extenders (BNF rule 89)
• Next by thread: CNET on XHTML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread