• To: richard@c...
• Subject: Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: So
• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:31:11 GMT
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200112170044.AAA20636@m...> (message fromRichard Tobin on Mon, 17 Dec 2001 00:44:05 GMT)
• References: <200112170044.AAA20636@m...>

> Um, no it isn't.  Only 0x7F are single bytes.  It's a single byte
> in Latin-N.

er yes, sorry obviously I posted too late in the evening:-)
But that doesn't alter the main point of my argument, it just means that
the last minute sop I added to say that NEL wasn't as bad as LS was
incorrect: it is as bad.

David


_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

• References:
  • Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: So
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: So me comments on the 1.1 draft)
• Next by Date: Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: Somecomments on the 1.1 draft)
• Previous by thread: Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: So
• Next by thread: Re: XML and mainframes, yet again (was RE: So mecomments on the 1.1 draft)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread