Mark Bartel wrote: > I second this sentiment, that going away from iconv would seem a very large > step back, and I'd also like to know more about the problems of which you > speak. I don't follow fully whether the proposed change will compromise Sablotron's effectiveness as a standalone processor; i.e., will it make Sab too tightly wedded to Perl? If so, that would be a bad thing, I think. Sablotron is slick enough to use in a pipeline as just one more processing phase, and it should keep all the standalone functionality it can. Steve
- [Sab] encodings - opinions? Tom Kaiser
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Matt Sergeant
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Kestutis Kupciunas
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Sander van Zoest
- Re[2]: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Pavel Storek
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Petr Cimprich
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Rui Hirokawa
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Tom Kaiser
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinion... Rui Hirokawa
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Mark Bartel
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Steve Tinney
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Petr Cimprich
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Tom Kaiser
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Steve Tinney
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Matt Sergeant
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Peter Flynn
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Tom Kaiser
- Re: [Sab] encodings - opinions? Peter Flynn
- [Sab] xsl:number �rvar K�rason
- Re: [Sab] xsl:number Petr Cimprich
- RE: RE: [Sab] xsl:number �rvar K�rason
