Re: Definitions

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Wed Nov 26 2003 - 07:21:37 EST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: How can I have OTF for MacOS"

    On 26/11/2003 02:29, Philippe Verdy wrote:

    > wrote:
    >>Briefly, it's my opinion that applications which claim to support
    >>and comply with Unicode should not 'step on' Unicode text. Any
    >>loopholes in the 'letter of the law' which allow applications to
    >>mung or reject Unicode text should be plugged.
    >If this "pluging" request must be done, it should be also the case for HTML
    >and XML.
    >For now, combining characters can be encoded directly just after a quote
    >character (single or double) used to mark the beginning of an attribute
    >value, or just after a tag-closing ">". HTML and XML parsers will parse
    >these quotes or superior signs by ignoring the combining sequence, creating
    >defective sequences, but this is a problem.
    Why is this a problem? Quotes and ">" with combining marks are
    presumably not legal HTML or XML; and so the interpretation of a quotes
    or ">" followed by combining marks as a quote or ">" and a defective
    combining sequence is unambiguous, surely? There could of course be
    problems if there were any precomposed combinations of quotes or ">"
    with combining characters, but I don't think there are any, are there?

    Your proposed solution to the problem is messy in requiring the use of
    numeric entities, and unnecessary.

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 26 2003 - 08:02:59 EST