Re: [Texmacs-dev] XML

[Joris van der Hoeven]

On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 08:02:32PM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote:
> How we use unicode dictionaries is debatable, though. Options are
> 
>   1) Encode TMML documents using e.g. UTF-8, and output symbols as "binary"
>      UTF-8 words.
> 
>      Drawback: Most text editors won't even be able to _open_ the document
>      properly.
> 
>   2) Use escape strings containing the character code, e.g. &#1F7E;
> 
>      Drawback: You won't be able to make sense of the document, when using
>      a text editor. But you will be able to open it.
> 
>   3) Use entity names but have an associated DTD (whereever that comes from)
> 
>      Drawback: TMML docs no longer stand-alone.
> 
>   4) Use entity names and put only the required DTD declarations into the 
>      TMML doc itself.
> 
>      Drawback: Ugly header in each TMML doc.
> 
> Thinking about it, 4) might be the best option (you wanted to autogenerate
> DTD code, didn't you :) After that, my next choice would be 2).

I would opt for 2. Remind that the litiguous characters are necessarily
very special, so we should not make our lives too difficult. If we really
want to make things better for the future, then we should submit all
our TeXmacs-specific mathematical characters for inclusion into Unicode.
Notice that all options still require the implementation of
a <tmsym>char</tmsym> fall-back scheme.