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

Re: Procesing requirements

From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:44:30 +0100
Cc: "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
Message-Id: <352D0D31-1189-4661-B06D-7067990A2820@cwi.nl>
To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>

On 18 jan 2010, at 21:06, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:51:38 +0100, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote:
> 
>>> We might still have to discuss if we want to tolerate some invalid
>>> percent-encoding and if non-UTF-8 encodings should be possible. (I think
>>> both are a bad idea.)
>> 
>> How is non-UTF8 encoding for other URI schemes dealt with?
> 
> I assume behavior is wildly different for different MIME types. For HTML the fragment component is decoded using the document's encoding, which leads to fun bugs when a browser guesses the wrong encoding of the document. If we allow non-UTF-8 encodings we have to determine it by context somehow, which is easy to break when copying URIs or if the environment somehow changes. Clearly, my "vote" is for mandating UTF-8 for now and change it only if there are implementation issues or feedback during last call.

Fully agreed. 
--
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 22:45:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:35 GMT