From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Rss produced by git is not valid xml? Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:28:47 -0800 Message-ID: <4381934F.3030307@zytor.com> References: <200511181833.40048.ismail@uludag.org.tr> <200511181926.10357.ismail@uludag.org.tr> <200511182127.06958.ismail@uludag.org.tr> <20051118200217.GA2831@vrfy.org> <4380C03B.9090603@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kay Sievers , Ismail Donmez , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 21 10:29:23 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ee7z2-0005eR-Oa for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:29:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932244AbVKUJ3G (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 04:29:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932245AbVKUJ3G (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 04:29:06 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:23738 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932244AbVKUJ3E (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 04:29:04 -0500 Received: from [172.27.0.18] (c-67-180-238-27.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.238.27]) (authenticated bits=0) by terminus.zytor.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jAL9Sl7t013164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:28:48 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.87.1, clamav-milter version 0.87 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on terminus.zytor.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > >>Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> >>>BTW, utf-8 was designed on purpose to be easily distinguishable from >>>other encodings so that you don't have to rely on every document >>>obeying a certain encoding. >>> >> >>No, it wasn't. It was designated on purpose to be ASCII-compatible, >>substring-safe, and minimally stateful. > > > For the record, my information stems from > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utf-8#Rationale_behind_UTF-8.27s_mechanics > That article is a bit confusing, as it mixes rationale with commentary. -hpa