From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Wed Nov 13 2002 - 09:25:21 EST
On 11/12/2002 11:50:51 PM "Doug Ewell" wrote:
>1. What extra processing is necessary to interpret Plane 14 tags that
>wouldn't be necessary to interpret any other form of tags?
Obviously, extra processing is needed either way.
>2. What extra processing is necessary to ignore Plane 14 tags that
>wouldn't be necessary to ignore any other Unicode character(s)?
None. And if some form of light-weight markup were used, then there would
inevitably be a need for some kind of character escape mechanism, so
ignoring language tagging would still entail interpreting of the escapes.
E.g.
#LT=en#This is English text, #LT=fr# et ce texte ci est en français.
#LT=en#To use the pound character in text, as in "He's in room ##4," you
have to encode it twice.
>3. Is there any method of tagging, anywhere, that is lighter-weight
>than Plane 14?
None that I can think of.
>Corollary: Is "lightweight" important?
Is this a corollary? It may be the crux of the issue. Tags using plane 14
characters may be the lightest mechanism around, but does anybody actually
need to avoid markup that badly?
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 13 2002 - 10:20:16 EST