Let's presume that we agreed that XML is not a language because it doesn't have semantics. What does that have to do with the applicability of its Unicode-handling model? Here is a list of a hundred specifications which we can probably agree have "useful semantics" that are all based on XML and thus have the same Unicode model: http://www.xml.org/xmlorg_registry/index.shtml XML's unicode model seems mostly appropriate to me. I can only see one reason it might not apply: which comes first the #! line or the #encoding line? We could say that the #! line can only be used in encodings that are direct supersets of ASCII (e.g. UTF-8 but not UTF-16). That shouldnt' cause any problems with Unix because as far as I know, Unix can only read the first line if it is in an ASCII superset anyhow! Then the second line could describe the precise ASCII superset in use (8859-1, 8859-2, UTF-8, raw ASCII, etc.). -- Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself When George Bush entered office, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 62 percent of Americans "would be willing to give up a few of the freedoms we have" for the war effort. They have gotten their wish. - "This is your bill of rights...on drugs", Harpers, Dec. 1999
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4