Re: Perceived Consensus: Murray's entity stuff goes in

Daniel W. Connolly (
Fri, 07 Oct 1994 17:01:50 -0500

In message <>, Peter Flynn writes:
>Dan writes:
>> I'm not quite sure what you're referring to, but...
>> Please don't put any proposals that involve characters outside of
>> ISO Latin 1 into the 2.0 spec.
>This means &nbsp: would be disallowed. It's in ISOpub I think.
>This also means &lt; and &gt; would have to go, as well as &amp;

I didn't mean to refer to the "Added Latin 1" entity set, but rather
ISO8859-1, the Latin1 character set, of which <, >, and non-breaking
space are all members (at positions 60, 62, and 160 respectively).

Keep in mind the distinction between the character set (ISO8859-1) and
the markup that can be used to represent characters (&#60;, &lt;,
&ouml;, &nbsp; etc.).

The &nbsp; markup can stay or go, as far as I'm concerned. You can put
it in the spec and say that Mosaic is buggy for not supporting it, or
you can propose it, or you can leave it out altogether until
2.1. Character 160 is a non-breaking space regardless.