> > I rather suspect that UTF-8 isn't the best default for any locale, > since real UTF-8 content is unlikely to rely on the last defaulting > step for decoding. I don't know why some Firefox localizations > default to UTF-8. Why do you assume that UTF-8 pages are better labeled than other encodings? Experience suggests otherwise :-). Although UTF-8 is positively detectable and several of us (Mark Davis and I, at least) have suggested making UTF-8 auto-detection a requirement, in fact, unless chardet is used, nothing causes unannounced UTF-8 to work any better than any other encoding. The I18N WG pointed out that for many developing languages and locales, the legacy encodings are fragmented and frequently font-based, making UTF-8 a better default choice. This is not the case for a relatively well-known language such as Belarusian or Welsh, but it is the case for many minority and developing world languages. Addison Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Lab126 Internationalization is not a feature. It is an architecture.Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 14:19:22 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:50 GMT