Andreas Jung wrote:
> --On 22. Juli 2006 16:17:09 +0200 Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> huh?..even on the file system a pt file is encoded using some encoding.
>>> For an XML pagetemplate file the encoding is clearly defined through
>>> the BOM (if available) and/or the XML preamble. So the most reliable
>>> solution would be to use XML PTs only.
>> Yes but you have to explicitely store that information "somehow" in the
>> file - zope objects can use other methods to transfer encoding
>> while they create the internal representation.
>> meta-tags for charset are quite ugly but you basically have no other
>> choice with filesystem stuff.
>> Problem here if the various encoding notifications collide (XML header
>> vs. XHTML meta-tag vs. BOM) so better have as few as possible - even
>> better none when
> I am only talking of XML. And the encoding is clearly and unambiguously
> defined through the BOM (if available) and the XML preamble. So any
Pardon, thats nonsense. BOM means byte oder mark and not encoding mark
(It would read EM instead, wouldnt it? ;) Its only used with some 16 bit
encodings to tell the byte order of the two bytes (obviously).
And XML only via its XML preambel, which is just another place to put
encoding information in band. (In fact we should have publishing engine
to fix this preamble as well as the infamous meta-tag (if available)
to reflect the encoding currently in use.
> application reading an XML file is able to detect the encoding and produce
> a unicode string from the file. According to a discussion with Dieter
Yes, and in case of the filesystempagetemplates and friends, the
template is that application which reads and should produce the unicode
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -