Subject: Re: [xsl] Unicode support From: "alex black" <enigma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:40:20 -0700 |
> > > > Not surprising we get so many encoding heachaches here while this > > > > attitude prevails. > > > > > > To be fair, it is software without *any cost* developed in people's > > > spare time. Which I have found to be extremely high quality, regardless of that fact :) > I can see this is one of those clashes of philosophy that probably can't > be resolved through a Usenet discussion. I think that people hacking on > what they like, for fun, should have whatever attitude they like! But I > don't expect you to agree. Amen. > In general, I think XML has really done an excellent job in bringing > Unicode into the mainstream of computer science. Java's native Unicode I agree about the Java thing, but XML really pushed unicode into the spotlight, which I think is great. I'm quite happy to see unicode support for building web apps, as dealing with individual charsets is a pain in the a** :) > support also helped to push other languages in the right direction. PHP is a good example. Once a IS0-8859-1 bigot, PHP is rapidly moving towards 100% utf support. > Microsoft has even been a positive force in this direction. *cough*yestheyhave.*cough* :) _a XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] Unicode support, Paul Prescod | Thread | Re: [xsl] Unicode support, Sebastian Rahtz |
[xsl] Unicode support, Paul Prescod | Date | Re: [xsl] Announcement: Xselerator , Lajos Moczar |
Month |