On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 07:38:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't think that any of our SGML documentation is actually in UCS-4
> > encoding.
> The source files use nothing beyond plain ASCII (and should remain that
> way, IMHO) so there isn't any need to inquire very far into exactly what
> the toolchain thinks the "document encoding" is.  The issue at hand here
> is what the *output* character set is, which is to say the "document
> character set" if I have the jargon right.  That is the space over which
> we are permitted to use &-entities.

What you're talking about is generally referred to as the "character
repertoire", the abstract set of characters a document is considered to
be composed of. For example: HTML4 (and XML IIRC) explicitly defines
the "character repertoire" to be Unicode, even though the "character
encoding" may only point to a subset of the total. Any others can be
generated via the &xxx; escape syntax.

I'm surprised about the difference in installations. I didn't use your
-c option because that directory does not exist on my computer, but
maybe that's all the difference...


Have a nice day,
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to 
> litigate.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to