Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[Malcolm T. <ma...@co...>]

On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 06:45:33PM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> Unless the document's encoding is declared otherwise, libxml (and
> therefore ScrollKeeper) assumes UTF-8:
> 
> http://xmlsoft.org/encoding.html
> 
> "If there is no encoding declaration, then the input has to be in either
> UTF-8 or UTF-16, if it is not then at some point when processing the
> input, the converter/checker of UTF-8 form will raise an encoding error.
> You may end-up with a garbled document, or no document at all !"
> 
> This means that in the case of OMF files in other encodings (like the
> one for ggv that started this discussion) we need to specify the
> encoding in the xml declaration.
> 
> The encodings that seem to be of importance to us:
> 
>    1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
>    2. UTF-16, both little and big endian

Where is UTF-16 being used commonly? Asian languages I know about (so
they tend to prefer local encodings at the moment), but are there any
others.

>    3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages

We'll need to be aware of all iso-8859, not just iso-8869-1, since many
European languages need them. For example, Czechs and the Slovaks use
8859-2, a lot of the Scandanavian countries use 8859-6, etc. Unless you
add the requirement that everything must be UTF-8, then we just need to
be able to do this generally (the Japanese and Chinese translators might
like us more, then, too).

And that's all assuming you don't want the Euro symbol, and ... oh ...
it's all getting too hard ... I need to go lie down now. :-(

Malcolm

--