Greg Ewing wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> Now I'm confused. Are we proposing that all our XML APIs read and
>> write encoded bytes, or are we proposing that they read and write
>> Unicode strings, leaving the encoding/decoding to the I/O stream?
>
> The design of XML seems a bit braindamaged
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Now I'm confused. Are we proposing that all our XML APIs read and
> write encoded bytes, or are we proposing that they read and write
> Unicode strings, leaving the encoding/decoding to the I/O stream?
The design of XML seems a bit braindamaged here, with the
encoding spe
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> On 7/22/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Sure, normally XML is serialized to bytes, but it is also
>> > serializable to unicode, and that's a useful feature to have (if
>> > implementable).
>>
>> It's not reasonably implementable; users who have use
On Sunday 22 July 2007, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Now I'm confused. Are we proposing that all our XML APIs read and
> write encoded bytes, or are we proposing that they read and write
> Unicode strings, leaving the encoding/decoding to the I/O stream? I
> thought the latter was preferred but no
On 7/22/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sure, normally XML is serialized to bytes, but it is also
> > serializable to unicode, and that's a useful feature to have (if
> > implementable).
>
> It's not reasonably implementable; users who have use cases
> will have to encode as UT
> Sure, normally XML is serialized to bytes, but it is also
> serializable to unicode, and that's a useful feature to have (if
> implementable).
It's not reasonably implementable; users who have use cases
will have to encode as UTF-8 first.
Regards,
Martin
James Y Knight wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2007, at 12:25 AM, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 21 July 2007, Joe Gregorio wrote:
>>> Should xml.parsers.expat.XMLParser.ParseFile(file) operate on
>>> both text and binary streams?
>> No. XML is a serialization of a markup language containing Unic
On Saturday 21 July 2007, James Y Knight wrote:
> Well...there's many reasons why it is useful to be able to parse an
> already-decoded unicode stream into XML, and to serialize XML into a
> unicode string. For example, if combining into a larger unicode
> document, or parsing from a literal st
On Jul 21, 2007, at 12:25 AM, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
> On Saturday 21 July 2007, Joe Gregorio wrote:
>> Should xml.parsers.expat.XMLParser.ParseFile(file) operate on
>> both text and binary streams?
>
> No. XML is a serialization of a markup language containing Unicode
> character
> into an
On Saturday 21 July 2007, Joe Gregorio wrote:
> Should xml.parsers.expat.XMLParser.ParseFile(file) operate on
> both text and binary streams?
No. XML is a serialization of a markup language containing Unicode character
into an encoded stream.
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
__
Should xml.parsers.expat.XMLParser.ParseFile(file) operate on
both text and binary streams?
If it should operate on text streams then an
issue arises from "read(n)" meaning different
things for text and binary streams. If the stream passed in
is "text" then read(n) will read
'n' unicode characters
11 matches
Mail list logo
