RE: [xml] Follow-up: Tips for correct encoding handling when buil ding documents from scratch?

["Henke, Markus" <Markus_Henke ordat com>]

Thanx again Daniel, and forgive me if my ignorance offends you...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard redhat com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:31 PM
> To: Henke, Markus
> Cc: 'xml gnome org'
> Subject: Re: [xml] Follow-up: Tips for correct encoding handling when
> building documents from scratch?
>
>
>   I have said it once, I have said it twice, I have pointed you at
> the docs stating it. It is mandatory to make that conversion
> at the application level. I won't repeat it again, I'm starting to
> get fed up, because you always repeat the same questions,
> [...] 
Wow, hey, one moment please! You've a hard day?
FYI (and to my defence):
Shurely i've posted several related questions to the same topic (that, 
BTW, isn't so obvious for each person as it may be for you).
And who may take the effort to look through the corresponding
threads will see that they build on each other, try to
clarify my intention and clear out misconceptions.
E.g., your answer to my previous question was (shortened):

[...]
> > So, is it abjectly to think about if there's
> > already a way (or if it's usefull to have one)

> it can be done with existing interfaces.

> > to handle the above mentioned scenario in a efficient way

> it cannot be done in an efficient way. 
[...]

So, i'm searching the docs and the references to the existing
interfaces to find a way, even if it's not the most efficient.
And i'm failed. Clearly, since i simply misunderstood your
"it can be done with existing interfaces". Silly me.
And i've dared to poste a new question, a new one in a infinite
sequence of enervating question, saying:
"Bummer, after that last answer i'd hoped it could work the
way i'm thinking of, but i cant't spot how...".
What a shame, i've well deserved that RTFM eruption... 


> and apparently don't dare looking at the API, code, docs or answers.
That's simply and provably wrong (and an unfair imputation).
I've named the functions i'm using, i've cited the library reference
and the documentation of libxml encoding support, i've provided
debugging information to illustrate my presumptions.


> It's now your 4th mail on this exact same topic,
> I have no other answer to make.
Look above...

> > Or is it possible to use the (default/extended) libxml 
> encoding support,
> > best while constructing the new nodes?
>
>   No it is NOT possible. You can use the encoding API to 
> convert *strings*
> but you will have to make those calls in *your* application code.

Are you shure... HHJK
Well, then that's exactly what i'll do.

> Daniel

Wondering, Markus