Re: [Geopriv] Domain identifier in common policy

FWIW, I just picked the first XML application that came to mind, in PHP. 
It doesn't support UTF-16. Source: http://de.php.net/xml and 
http://de.php.net/manual/en/ref.xml.php#xml.encoding

 From all I can tell for PHP, it represents strings in their 'native' 
(byte) representation, so that if you have two XML documents, one using 
8859-1 and one UTF-8, you need to convert between them to compare 
literal strings outside the ASCII range. 
(http://de.php.net/manual/en/language.types.string.php)

I don't see why restricting character sets to UTF-8 complicates processing.

Andrew Newton wrote:
> Usually they pass back the element content as a unicode compatible 
> string or an array of unicode compatible characters, and the application 
> does not need to make a distinction between UTF-8 and UTF-16.  Some 
> languages have native Unicode support, but in cases where that is not 
> true special types are defined to represent xml character data.
> 
> -andy
> 
> On Jan 6, 2006, at 4:39 AM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> 
>> How do XML parsers pass back string elements to the application?
>>
>>> Unless you foresee the development of special purpose XML parsers for 
>>> this application, I can see no advantage to ruling out UTF-16.  As 
>>> for your stated disadvantage, which XML parsers pass raw bytes to the 
>>> application instead of a common format?  Admittedly there are gobs of 
>>> XML parsers out there, but I've never seen one that does this.
>>> -andy
>>