W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > May 2004

RE: Authoring Techniques Document

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 22:14:04 +0100
To: 'François Yergeau' <francois@yergeau.com>
Cc: <www-i18n-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1BLqBw-0001kW-4b@dr-nick.w3.org>

Hello François,

Thankyou for your comments on the first WD of  Authoring Techniques for XHTML & HTML Internationalization.  Please find responses below.

The version you commented on is http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-i18n-html-tech-20031009/

Note also that we intend to release new working drafts before the AC meeting.  We have, in the meantime, split the original document up into 3 topic-focussed documents.  We aim to produce more such documents as we develop the material.  The in-edit versions of the new documents are:
		Characters and Encodings 1.0 
		http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-character.html
		Specifying the language of content 1.0 
		http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-lang.html
		Handling Bidirectional Text 1.0 
		http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-bidi.html

There is also a new outline overview document at http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/outline/html-authoring-outline.html




> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-i18n-comments-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-i18n-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of François 
> Yergeau
> Sent: 11 October 2003 04:35
> To: www-i18n-comments@w3.org
> Subject: A couple of comments on Authoring Techniques
> 
> 
> 3.2 says "Where practical, declare the page's character encoding by 
> setting the charset parameter in the HTTP Content-Type header."
> 
> I think this should be just the opposite: servers should shut up and 
> let (X)HTML documents speak for themselves.  Several years' experience 
> has shown that servers get it wrong much of the time when they bother 
> to set charset.  Since this setting has precedence, this really breaks 
> the whole thing.  Please recommend that servers *not* set charset, 
> unless they have a good reason to do it and actually do it right.


Yes, we discussed this.  The consensus was to leave as is, but provide pros and cons in the explanation which made these points.  See http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-character.html#IDARUJO


> 
> See also the recent thread on the TAG list on this (starting at [1]) 
> as well as section 4.9.6 of the Web Architecture WD
> [2]: "In the case of XML, since it is self-describing, it is good 
> practice to omit the charset parameter".
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0042.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-webarch-20031001/#xml-media-types
> 
> ===================================================================
> 
> In 4.1, there's an ed. note that says "Describe the evils of using 
> <font> to cheat on the charset and represent other scripts."  You may 
> want to take a look at my old (1996) rant on this at 
> http://babel.alis.com/web_ml/html/fontface.html.


Thanks.  We will reread that when we next update that section.



Thanks for your comments!
Richard
For the GEO TF



> 
> --
> François
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 6 May 2004 17:14:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:34 GMT