|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Unicode and XML (was Re: Remembering the origina
At 2003-02-16 10:35, Mike Champion wrote: >On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 09:19:32 -0800, Tim Bray <tbray@t...> wrote: > > >>Fair enough, but if you remove all the unicode-character apparatus from >>XML 1.0 you probably cut that in half. Which is one of the only >>important *technical* differences between XML and SGML - SGML was really >>underspecified on what a "character" was. At the end of the day XML's >>main technical contribution may turn out to have been that it dragged >>Unicode into the mainstream. > >Stupid question: Why couldn't XML incorporate Unicode by reference rather >than spending half of the spec defining the "unicode-character apparatus"? Because Unicode did not define a Name -- and what the spec did say about identifiers is not normative and not really formally enough defined to write a parser for. (One result is that those like Tim Bray who wanted to just extract the relevant character lists from the Unicode character set property tables succeeded in moving what XML 1.0 says a little bit away from what little the Unicode spec did say about identifiers.) There is also the fact that the Unicode Standard keeps changing. Michael
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








