Re: Numeric char references

Peter Flynn (pflynn@curia.ucc.ie)
Thu, 8 Jun 95 10:47:15 EDT

Jon (B) writes:

I proposed last week that we include a complete list, in numeric
order, of the entire Latin-1 character set from 160 through 255
standardized by ISO 8859-1. It has been decided (for good reasons
that I don't completely agree with but do understand) not to include
that list, but I think that anyone who needs to ask this kind of
question should keep a copy of it handy for reference purposes. I
append a copy below. Note that these entity names are taken from the
appendices to ISO 8879 and that three of them (uml, macr, and cedil)
do not agree with the names given in the Proposed Entities section of
the current draft snapshot.

Those names should be fixed, I guess.

Can I ask the charset gureaux...

a. do you (we) have any proposed behavior for a client if it finds
raw characters in the range 128-159?

b. or if it finds something like ™ ?

BTW, is it true that 8879 does not define numeric encodings, that this
is done in 8859? If so, what was the purpose of leaving 128-159
blank? Just because they're the flip side of 0-31?

///Peter