RE: [xsl] Upper ASCII chars

Subject: RE: [xsl] Upper ASCII chars
From: Jay Burgess <jburgess@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 12:00:01 -0600
You guys are making this issue bigger than I need it to be... :)

I'm simply testing that if a user enters a character in the range 128-255 as part of their data, that our software doesn't do anything weird to it. It's not relevant which codepage was in use when the data was entered, as we simply pass the binary value of the character through (or at least that's what the tests are supposed to validate). When the user enters 0x9B, etc., it'll be the character that they want it to be.

But thanks for the comments.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Perret [mailto:jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 11:42 AM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [xsl] Upper ASCII chars

> > (Michael) Oh dear: "upper ASCII". There's no such thing. ASCII stops > > at 0x7F. A good first rule in understanding character coding issues > > is to get your terminology straight! > > > Yes, ASCII is a 7-bit protocol. But in the all the years I've been in this > business, when someone says "upper ASCII", everyone else knows what they're > talking about. Since my goal was to define my problem, and all three of you > seemed to understand the issue, I believe it accomplished its purpose.

As far as I can tell, when someone says "upper ASCII" it is foretelling of
a character encoding problem : it usually means "8-bit characters outside
of ASCII, whose encoding has not been specified". For example, what
character is at 0x9B ? For the three most commonly encountered
codepages on the PC :
IBM 850 : o slash (ø)
IBM 437 : c slash (¢)
windows 1252 ('ANSI')/latin-1 : right single guillemet (>)

I hope for you that your ssi parser will be lucky in its choice of
particularly if you are under Windows since windows uses different
codepages for the UI ('ANSI') and for filenames ('OEM').


XSL-List info and archive:

XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread