W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2012

[whatwg] IBM864 mapping of Encoding Standard

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:48:10 +0300
Message-ID: <CAJQvAucUk3o5yYe1cD=DsTXzp9_t9XjyM+shX7WT6ogoWhyXEA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:31 AM, Makoto Kato <m_kato at ga2.so-net.ne.jp> wrote:
> (2012/04/20 17:09), Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Does that mean you want to remove the encoding from Gecko? That would
>> work for me. It is currently not supported by Opera either.
>> Alternatively mapping 0xA7 to U+20AC works for me too, but I don't want
>> it to tinker with the ASCII range.
>
>
> Except to OS/2 and AIX, I think that this encoding is unnecessary since most
> browsers aren't supported.

Does the OS/2 port need it for interfacing with the system APIs? If
the OS/2 port needs it for interfacing with the system APIs, can we
stop exposing the encoding to the Web and can we stop building the
IBM864 encoder/decoder on non-OS/2 platforms? I think it's a bad idea
to vary the supported set of Web-exposed encodings by operating
system.

IIRC, some old Mac encodings that are still relevant for dealing with
legacy fonts were hidden from Web content and UTF-7 was made
mail-only.

If OS/2 doesn't need it for system APIs, can we just remove the IBM864
support altogether.

Is the AIX port still relevant? I thought 3.6 was the last version
ported to AIX.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen at iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 23:48:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:07 GMT