Tim Bray wrote:
On Mar 7, 2005, at 10:31 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:
>for some implementors, HTML is actually easier, if they are handing a chunk of bytes to an HTML rendering control, they'd rather not reconstruct the syntax from the infoset, they'd rather just take an opaque chunk of bytes.
I really hope they don't take an opaque chunk of bytes, because if they do, they'll have no clue about the character encoding.
Not true; if you can parse the XML to find the <atom:content> then you know the character encoding and can tell your HTML renderer. -Tim
I think Martin was talking about the producer: if all he has is a chunk of *bytes*, there's no reliable way top put that into an HTML-typed text construct (you'll need characters, not bytes).
Best regards, Julian
-- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
