• To: 'xml-dev@l... ' <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Genx
• From: Marc-Antoine Parent <maparent@a...>
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:24:09 -0500
• In-reply-to: <E40F8B75-4C55-11D8-905C-000A95A51C9E@t...>
• References: <C85FBC6B-4B14-11D8-905C-000A95A51C9E@t...> <200401211840.i0LIeLo07627@d...> <20040121195737.GH30165@s...> <E40F8B75-4C55-11D8-905C-000A95A51C9E@t...>

> If someone wants to put a generic UTF-16 processor on top of genx, 
> that would be fine.  I don't see the demand for supporting it at the 
> input end of genx because the UTF-16 centric languages like Java and 
> C# have decent xml-writing software already. -Tim

Makes sense. One note, however; a C program might receive a UCS-16 
string from elsewhere, eg a file or database, and want to pass it on 
without processing.
Still, the conversion from UCS-16 to either UTF-8 or UCS-32 is 
trivial...
Marc-Antoine Parent

smime.p7s

• References:
  • Genx
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Genx
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: Genx
    • From: jcowan@r...
  • Re: Genx
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Genx
• Next by Date: Re: Genx
• Previous by thread: Re: Genx
• Next by thread: Re: Genx
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread