Alan Manuel Gloria scripsit: > 1. NLF (new line function) is LF | CR | CR LF | NEL > > 2. Treat any kind of NLF the same. > > 3. "A readline function should stop at NLF, LS, FF, or PS"
Take it from the guy at the sharp point of the XML 1.1 mess: the only newlines anyone cares about are CR, LF, and CR+LF, and even CR is obsolescent. NEL is used only on EBCDIC systems, and conversion to ASCII usually changes it to LF rather than U+0085. LS was Unicode's attempt to kill CR/LF/CR+LF, which failed completely. Nobody uses FF or PS. (CR NEL, which is supported in XML 1.1, is the result of half-assed round-tripping of CR+LF via EBCDIC.) > Should we adhere to the Unicode specs more closely, even at the cost > of a more annoying Guile behavior? No. -- John Cowan co...@ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy. Dennett and Bennett are well-known. Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett. There is also one Dummett. By their works shall ye know them. However, just as no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly known by his works. Indeed, Bummett does not exist. It is part of the function of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
