• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: [off-topic] xtext -- encoding declarations for text
• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 17:41:02 +0100 (BST)
• Cc:
• In-reply-to: <058301c31e13$b9200080$4bc8a8c0@A...>
• Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

>http://www.topologi.com/resources/xtext.html  has a little idea about
>how to revise XML's encoding
>declaration system to cover non-XML formats.

If something like this is used, I *strongly* recommend limiting it to
a single line - unlike the XML declaration.  The possibility of
multi-line declarations is an annoying complication when there is the
possibility of line breaks that depend on the encoding, as in XML 1.1.
The declaration should be readable based only on the character set
knowledge that can be gleaned from the first few characters (e.g. that
it's a superset of ascii, or that it's a variant of ebcdic).

Also, the fact that the first few characters depend on the application
will make it hard to write general transcoders.

-- Richard

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [off-topic] xtext -- encoding declarations for text
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• References:
  • [off-topic] xtext -- encoding declarations for text
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why Standards?
• Next by Date: RE: key constraint question
• Previous by thread: Re: [off-topic] xtext -- encoding declarations for text
• Next by thread: Re: [off-topic] xtext -- encoding declarations for text
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread