RE: japanese xml

From: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com
Date: Fri Aug 31 2001 - 13:16:52 EDT


On 31/08/2001 17:16:23 Marco Cimarosti wrote:
[...]
> (Misha, I hope I finally succeeded figuring out what you were meaning!)
>
> Ciao.
> _ Marco

I agree 100% :-)

Regarding Viranga's question about inventing one's own encoding (in the
sense of Internet "charset"), anyone is free to design an encoding and
use it, so long as they label the resulting files correctly. That, of
course, does not mean that anyone else will bother to make their parser
understand your encoding. Here's a quote from:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#charencoding

xml> In an encoding declaration, the values "UTF-8", "UTF-16",
xml> "ISO-10646-UCS-2", and "ISO-10646-UCS-4" should be used for the various
xml> encodings and transformations of Unicode / ISO/IEC 10646, the values
xml> "ISO-8859-1", "ISO-8859-2", ... "ISO-8859-n" (where n is the part
xml> number) should be used for the parts of ISO 8859, and the values
xml> "ISO-2022-JP", "Shift_JIS", and "EUC-JP" should be used for the various
xml> encoded forms of JIS X-0208-1997. It is recommended that character
xml> encodings registered (as charsets) with the Internet Assigned Numbers
xml> Authority [IANA-CHARSETS], other than those just listed, be referred to
xml> using their registered names; other encodings should use names starting
xml> with an "x-" prefix. XML processors should match character encoding
xml> names in a case-insensitive way and should either interpret an
xml> IANA-registered name as the encoding registered at IANA for that name or
xml> treat it as unknown (processors are, of course, not required to support
xml> all IANA-registered encodings).

And, as Marco remarked, the only encodings which must be supported
by all parsers are UTF-8 and UTF-16.

Misha

-----------------------------------------------------------------
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 14:16:25 EDT