asterisks as bold or italic? (another push)
public at quillio.com
Tue Mar 30 18:42:29 EST 2004
On Mar 30, 2004, at 5:41 PM, Timothy Binder wrote:
> I hadn't realized that XML only had the five entities. That explains
> the use of decimal-encoded entities in SmartyPants. (I'm with the
> folks who miss the larger entity set. It seems like the geeks winning
> over the users.
No need to miss named symbol entities; even the W3C's XHTML1 DTD
defines them (by reference to HTMLlat1.ent, HTMLsymbol.ent, and
HTMLspecial.ent, I believe). But if your content is re-purposed as
straight XML -- say, as an RSS feed -- you'll have to provide your own
mappings for mnemonic entity names like —. Right now, the W3C
XHTML DTDs reference the HTML DTD, which references files containing
the entity name mappings to UNICODE. And Web browsers are very liberal
So right now it's just practical: embedding only numbered entities in
your content will keep your RSS feed from breaking. Your content
system _might_ transform these before writing your XML file, but most
don't. Your content system _might_ embed a reference in your XML file
to a DTD that defines the common named entities, but most don't. You
could do it yourself, but most don't.
It's just a little hairy still, is all, and there's a shooting holy war
over how liberal the popular interpreters of popular XML content (like
feed readers and RSS) should be. Most are very strict, and refuse
mal-formed XML altogether. When somebody's feed goes dark in your RSS
reader but their site's not down, it's almost always because your Web
browser abides a character or two that your RSS reader chokes on.
Makes everybody sad and confused. Embedding numbered entity references
in the content erases the issue. It's just easier, not "correct."
(Thanks again to Jelks for refreshing me on this crap.)
> I can see caps>>emphasis in print>>SHOUTING, if that's what you have
> in mind -- it's a natural progression -- but underscore?
More information about the Markdown-discuss