Re^4: Converting HTML special entities to XML

It really depends on what kind of processing you are doing. Dealing with the unescaped characters is the safest approach but it requires dealing with charset issues, making sure the output is escaped properly.

Dealing with the escape text, in its native charset, is simpler. Character references can help because you don't need to worry about character sets for them; they are always Unicode. In fact, they are the safest way to get Unicode characters in a document with all the charset mangling that goes on.

Comment on Re^4: Converting HTML special entities to XML

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: Converting HTML special entities to XML
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Sep 02, 2004 at 17:24 UTC

All that is why I'm giving the recommendation that I'm giving. :-)

You can work with escaped characters avoid going through Unicode, if you wish; but it is hard to get that really right and most people don't.

That's why I assert that you should not work with the HTML directly and should not work with the XML directly. It's safest to think of HTML and XML not as a data format, but as an opaque serialization of a data structure. You ask one deserializer for the data structure, and get something unambiguous (ie, Unicode) that you can work to your heart's content with; then you give the still unambiguous result to another serializer that produces conforming output for you.

As I said, you can do it differently. Just as you can avoid using strict. It's jut much easier to not shoot yourself in the foot if you stick to that practice.

Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]


Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer
	PerlMonks