W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > July 2012

[Bug 15359] Make BOM trump HTTP

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 04:44:25 +0000
Message-Id: <E1Sn0P3-0000zq-KH@jessica.w3.org>
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org

--- Comment #14 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2012-07-06 04:44:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
>> BOM is a side track. My question was: Do you dislike the "user 
>> experience" of XML when it comes to its prohibitance against manual
>> encoding overriding? [ ... ]
> For strict, valid, well-formed, XML, served with an explicit XML Content-Type,
> then no, I have no problem with the idea.
> My problem is applying those rules to billions of pages that are *not* strict,
> valid, well-formed, XML, served with an explicit XML Content-Type.

If all browsers implement the IE/Webkit behaviour, then there is no
problem. If you know that it is a problem, then you should provide 
evidence thereof - for instance by pointing to a page that gets
broken if this behaviour is implemented.

> > Correct. It is currently also against the HTTP specs.
> I'm very sorry, but I did a lot of research and I can't find anything that says
> this. Is this a current spec. or a draft spec.?

It is common sense - and specified - that HTTP's charset parament should
trumph anything inside the document. This goes for HTML and for XML.
_THAT_ is the controversial side of this bug: This bug ask the BOM to
override the HTTP charset parameter. (The point I have been making, that
BOM should also 'override manual user overriding', is part of the same
thing - I just wanted to be sure that everone got that.)

> I know that no-one here seems to like any specs. other than this one that
> they're writing, but I just don't see any way that this not just another
> "willful violation".

Exactly. That is what it is.

>> So, now you are offering me at least one use case: To allow users to
>> place the page in quirks-mode. Frankly: I dismiss that use case.
> Better than getting unreadable garbage because someone specified an incorrect
> BOM/charset combination on some 10-year-old document.

You are welcome to demonstrate that it is an actual problem.

Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 6 July 2012 04:44:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:30 UTC