> How's this:
>
> Under the section:
>
> The ISO Latin 1 Character Repertoire
> http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html#SEC32
>
> There's a note:
>
> http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_foot.html#FOOT15
>
> (15)
>
> |To support non-western writing systems, a larger character repertoire
> |will be specified in a future version of HTML. The document character
> |set will be ISO10646, or some subset that agrees with ISO10646; in
> |particular, all numeric character references must use code positions
> |assigned by ISO10646.
Good language for a fallback position, but I'm not ready to fall back
just yet. I haven't seen a clear reason why we should abandon 10646
as the document character set. As far as I can tell (and I could be
wrong!), the only practical effect of adopting 10646 as the doc
character set in 2.0 is that it covers the case where someone
explicitly puts "〹" in the data stream. Someone please
straightem me out if I've misunderstood this.
Jon