W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: removing the srcdoc

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:52:18 +0100
Message-ID: <4B5F2BD2.9020203@gmx.de>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> If you omit the charset, I think it will attempt to default to
>>> windows-1252.  At least, it apparently will with text/html.  Not sure
>>> ...
>> I don't think this is true. As far as I can tell, the default is impl/local
>> specific.
> 
> True, but having the US locale and possibly others default to
> windows-1252 is still a bad thing.  It's an annoying legacy constraint
> that causes problems every time I forget to write the charset meta in
> my pages.
> 
>> Anyway, adding a BOM should be sufficient for triggering UTF-8.
> 
> Adding a BOM to the data url?  Why would I do that?  That's less bytes
> than the charset declaration, but more difficult to remember and
> enormously more arcane.

Why would you care when it's automatically generated?

>>> what happens with text/html-sandboxed.
>>>
>>> The DOCTYPE is required or else the page will be in quirks mode.
>> Well, that's something we could change for text/html-sandboxed. Also, we
>> could allow fragments of HTML. (Or even require them?)
> 
> Indeed, that seems like it could be a good solution.

Indeed. Fine-tuning the behaviour for the new MIME type for the use 
cases it should cover sounds like a good plan.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 2010 17:52:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:13 UTC