• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• To: stephengreenubl@g...
• Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 09:28:08 +0000

On 10/12/2010 08:56, Stephen Green wrote:
> Does newXML being treatable as a string mean the *UTF-8 default* requirement
> is better relaxed in some way? I mean, a developer writing a string doesn't want
> to have to ensure it is all written in UTF-8 do they?

why would any person ever have to know what the utf8 encoding is? If you 
want an "a" then you can enter an a without knowing what the latin1 or 
ascii or utf8 encodings of an a are. They happen to all be the same in 
that case. If you pick another letter such as pound sign, or e acute 
they happen to be different, but since typically a human doesn't know 
any of the numbers it doesn't make any difference, it's just a matter of 
what your text editor does when you hit save.

David

________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: relax UTF-8 default? was: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>

• References:
  • relax UTF-8 default? was: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>