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

Reply via email to