Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 28/12/2012 19:45, Chris Maloney wrote: > Roger, > > Here is a classic post from XML.com that is right in line with the > topic of character encodings that you have been posting about > recently, titled "XML on the web has failed": > http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/07/21/dive.html > > Well, it's a very sensible article spoilt by a very silly title. What the title should be is "XML has failed to solve the problem of character miscoding", and that of course is true, and is inevitably true, because so long as we have programs exchanging "strings" with each other (whether by procedure calls, on the wire, or via file storage) without also exchanging reliable and secure metadata about the character encoding of those strings, character miscoding will continue to be a problem. XML has done its bit to solve that problem, and has made a useful contribution (as has HTTP), but there's no way XML can solve the problem on its own. Just consider: can we ban people from using text editors that allow you to put encoding="utf-8" in an XML declaration when the file is actually iso 8859-1? Until we can, how can we solve the miscoding problem? Michael Kay Saxonica
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
