W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [HTML5] 2.8 Character encodings

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 09:33:33 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Cc: public-html-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0909030930060.26930@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann wrote:
>
> Even more, if the version of the language is indicated within the 
> document, it is defined by the author, which version of the language is 
> relevant and the others are irrelevant. If not and there is no other 
> information available, it is undefined. It can be a good first approach 
> to try the newest language for a guess. Analysis of the content can lead 
> to an even better/different guess.

An even better solution is to extend the language in a way that doesn't 
harm pre-existing documents, such that no version numbering is necessary. 
This is what HTML5 does.


> You claimed, that the new version defines the meaning of old versions 
> too. This can only be true, if there are no inconsistencies and the new 
> version is a real superset of the old.

No. I claim that the new version defines the processing of all versions to 
the extent necessary to handle existing documents in a manner that is 
acceptable to users.

I believe we have succeeded with this; if there are cases where we have 
failed, please demonstrate these cases, by showing actual 
non-demonstration documents on the Web with actual non-demonstration 
software being processed in a way that conflicts what HTML5 says.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 09:31:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:00 GMT