W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Issue with @charset vs. @encoding in XML Scripting Module

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:35:12 +0100
To: "Roland Merrick" <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
Cc: "XHTML WG" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>, public-xhtml2-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.un32syjzsmjzpq@acer3010>

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:53:24 +0100, Roland Merrick  
<roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com> wrote:

> Greetings Shane, fair question. During the October face to face we
> discussed this [1] and made a resolution:
>
>         RESOLUTION: keep everything from XHTML 1.0 definition of script
>
> So the question in my mind is why change from @charset to @encoding in
> XHTML2?
>         " SM: changed for XHTML2 in response to comment from i18n "
>
> but what was their rationale?

Because it isn't a charset. It's an encoding. The Unicode character set  
can be encoded in a number of different ways (UTF8, UTF16 for instance).  
And the term used in XML (on the XML declaration) is encoding too.

I think we should do as with lang, and have both, with @charset for legacy  
use.

Steven

> People have now become familiar with
> @charset and even our description of @encoding feels it necessary to
> mention how it relates to accept-chaset in http. Perhaps someone can
> articulate the benefit of changing and how it outweighs the disadvantages
> of change.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xhtml-minutes.html#item03
> Regards, Roland
>
>
>
> From:
> Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
> To:
> XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
> Date:
> 20/01/2009 19:55
> Subject:
> Issue with @charset vs. @encoding in XML Scripting Module
>
>
>
>
> XML Events 2 defines the XML Scripting Module [1] - this module defines
> the script element and its required attributes.  While working with this
> module and its Schema and RelaxNG implementations, Markus and I ran into
> a quandary that I do not know how to address.
>
> XML Events 2 has two different audiences.  There is the "today" audience
> that might need the XML Scripting Module, and the "tomorrow" audience
> that will use all the modules in languages like XHTML 2 and XForms 1.2.
>
> Right now, the script element uses the @charset attribute as defined in
> XHTML Modularization 1.1 [2].  And that's fine.  It makes sense in a
> pre-XHTML 2 world.  However, if we are going to include XML Scripting in
> XHTML 2, we really don't want @charset.  @charset has been superseded by
> @encoding.
>
> Anyway - in implementing the script element for XHTML 2 I decided that
> we really meant @encoding.  This is in conflict with the draft XML
> Events 2 spec though.
>
> Question: Do we change XML Events 2 to use @encoding as defined in XHTML
> 2, change XHTML 2 to use @charset for this one element, or develop a new
> version of the XML Scripting module in XHTML 2 that overrides the one in
> XML Events 2?
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xml-events-20081223/#s_script_module
> [2]
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/ED-xhtml2-20090109/mod-scripting.html#s_scriptingmodule
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 14:35:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 February 2010 18:12:50 GMT