Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Yeah, but that's nothing compared to what we have planned for the spec editors. len From: Elliotte Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] Robin Berjon wrote: > Of all people *we* should know that the encoding of text on a global > scale is not a static science, it evolves and needs to evolve as Unicode > improves. Yes this implies a phase during which XML processors may lose > some interoperability, but whoever puts XML interoperability above human > language operability needs to have their priorities seriously revised. > Yes this may break software that is making stupid assumptions about the > content of certain tokens, but such software was written based on a > misunderstanding of text and deserves to break (and then to be shot in > the kneecaps, tied to a horse and dragged all around town, dipped in > boiling lead, dismembered piece by piece with a rusty spoon, and finally > dumped in a ditch to agonize). That's a pretty harsh punishment for actually implementing the specs as written.
|
