Content deleted Content added
explanation of character entity grouping reversions |
|||
Line 98:
Is it true that only [[Mozilla]] based browsers convert characters – not given in the default encoding – to unicode entities? Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? --[[User:Hhielscher|Hhielscher]] 09:32, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:in firefox i know i can just paste in charactors outside latin1 and they end up as entities. I just tried doing the same in IE and it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASandbox&diff=0&oldid=11571457 did] seem to convert it to an entity (though its not impossible that this was a hack performed by mediawiki rather than IE doing the right thing.
== Character entity groups ==
While it is true that the character entities are divided into 3 groups, it does not help the reader's understanding of the relationship between Unicode and HTML to explain this to them. The groupings are basically arbitrary and exist as historical artifacts from the standardization processes that went into defining them (I had a hand in this, albeit very minor). If groupings are to be explained, it'd be better achieved by basing them on the comments from the .ent files, which go to a more precise level of detail that is aligned with the names of Unicode ranges.
I am also tired of cleaning up edits that, while detailed, take a very conversational, not encyclopedic, tone and are rife with errors in spelling, capitalization, punctuation and grammar. If I continue to see these, I am increasingly likely to revert them wholesale, regardless of what useful content they may include. Sorry to be surly, but I get the feeling that some are taking excessive advantage of others' willingness to clean up these mistakes. — [[User:Mjb|mjb]] 19:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
| |||