Agreed.
No standard for markup of living systems should. The beauty of XML is it
can be jiggered to do any language if you want to build in data types or
special character entities of various kinds. The question is who has to
use those? The case being made for entities is once again to grandfather
HTML first, those being sets in widespread use. That makes the call
statistical favoring the largest bodies of users first followed by local
sets at some point of isolation from the largest cluster.
Isolates are lost.
len
From: Pete Cordell [mailto:]
So the Cherokee and other language speakers have to be a bit patient while
the changes flush through the system before they can assume that the
Cherokee XML languages will interoperate smoothly. However, I think that is
a better situation than the W3C dictating that all those language speakers
will never be able to use their preferred language.
Regards,
Pete
[1]
http://recycledknowledge.blogspot.com/2008/02/which-characters-are-excluded-
in-xml.html
[2] http://norman.walsh.name/2008/02/07/xml105e
--
Pete Cordell
Codalogic
