Re: pgsql: We're going to have to spell dotless i

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: We're going to have to spell dotless i
Date: 2006-09-24 23:38:20
Message-ID: 13213.1159141100@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> writes:
> I don't think that any of our SGML documentation is actually in UCS-4
> encoding.

The source files use nothing beyond plain ASCII (and should remain that
way, IMHO) so there isn't any need to inquire very far into exactly what
the toolchain thinks the "document encoding" is. The issue at hand here
is what the *output* character set is, which is to say the "document
character set" if I have the jargon right. That is the space over which
we are permitted to use &-entities.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-09-25 00:36:16 Re: pgsql: We're going to have to spell dotless i
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2006-09-24 23:21:30 Re: pgsql: We're going to have to spell dotless i

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gevik Babakhani 2006-09-25 00:01:17 TODO: Fix CREATE CAST on DOMAIN Part II
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2006-09-24 23:21:30 Re: pgsql: We're going to have to spell dotless i