Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f5BIj7f13626 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:07 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5BIj6p28207 . for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5BIj5U18579 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:05 +0200 (MET DST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0F2A6.A26E3B80" Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA26320 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:05 +0200 (MEST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5BIj4U18575 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <4.85C82B60@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:42:41 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 498100 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:01 +0200 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA20707 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:00 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA42896 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:00 +0200 Received: from algonet.se (sinclair.tninet.se [195.100.94.101]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5BIj0115434 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:45:00 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [195.100.226.130] (du130-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.130]) by sinclair.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.2) with ESMTP id 896967.285089.992sinclair-s2 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:44:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <15140.56967.404556.67190@spqr-tosh.oucs.ox.ac.uk> References: <15119.62808.151690.192812@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Return-Path: X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: \InputTranslation Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 19:42:28 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Hans Aberg" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4126 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0F2A6.A26E3B80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 16:06 +0100 2001/06/11, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: >Any XML tool is mandated to handle UTF-8, fwiw. The main thing is that you are sure that Unicode editors supports UTF8. = If you are sure of that, then perhaps support for other Unicode encodings = will not be needed. But past experience has shown that it is difficult to dictate what = people will use, so perhaps there pop up other favored formats than just UTF8. > > But what says that UTF8 is the preferred format of editors; >Unicode is an abstract encoding, of which UTF-8 is the commonest >instantiation. So "simply use Unicode" does not mean much. "Simply use Unicode" would probably mean to map the Unicode character = codes to say 32-bit binary numbers without first passing it through an = encoding like UTF8. Give this instantiation a name, like Unicode-32, if you like. -- I think that one reason that people at this time look favorably at = UTF8 over say Unicode-32 is that the former is somewhat more compact. = However, it will be slower, and one can just as well use a file compression = scheme on those, which would be more efficient than UTF8. So for such reasons, I am not sure that UTF8 will become such a hit. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0F2A6.A26E3B80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: \InputTranslation

At 16:06 +0100 2001/06/11, Sebastian Rahtz = wrote:
>Any XML tool is mandated to handle UTF-8, = fwiw.

The main thing is that you are sure that Unicode = editors supports UTF8. If
you are sure of that, then perhaps support for other = Unicode encodings will
not be needed.

But past experience has shown that it is difficult to = dictate what people
will use, so perhaps there pop up other favored = formats than just UTF8.

> > But what says that UTF8 is the preferred = format of editors;

>Unicode is an abstract encoding, of which UTF-8 is = the commonest
>instantiation. So "simply use Unicode" = does not mean much.

"Simply use Unicode" would probably mean to = map the Unicode character codes
to say 32-bit binary numbers without first passing it = through an encoding
like UTF8. Give this instantiation a name, like = Unicode-32, if you like.

-- I think that one reason that people at this time = look favorably at UTF8
over say Unicode-32 is that the former is somewhat = more compact. However,
it will be slower, and one can just as well use a = file compression scheme
on those, which would be more efficient than = UTF8.

So for such reasons, I am not sure that UTF8 will = become such a hit.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0F2A6.A26E3B80--