W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2002

RE: glyph selection for Unicode in browsers

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 13:41:23 +0900
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20021002121459.07043030@localhost>
To: jarkko.hietaniemi@nokia.com, <www-international@w3.org>, <unicode@unicode.org>

At 12:14 02/10/01 -0400, jarkko.hietaniemi@nokia.com wrote:

>I agree that 'sniffing' and 'guessing' are ill-defined, and not to be
>relied upon.  However, I find it a bit 'ill-defined' that there is no
>well-defined (web server independent) way for the 'users' to override
>the possibly wrong encoding default of the web server.  Either way
>(a) the user has to do something web server dependent
>(b) the admin has to do changes to the site config
>seems a bit clunky and fragile.
>
>Since the current "resolving order" is obviously already deployed out
>there and relied upon by someone, it cannot be changed, but possibly
>something new could be introduced?

Well, servers can always be improved by the various server implementers.
What standards specify is what goes 'over the wire'.

The only thing you actually have to do is to make sure that the server
doesn't add a 'charset' parameter to the Content-Type header for
the directories you are using. Then the <meta> is the only info,
and is used by the browser.

I'm not sure this is possible with Apache, maybe there is a need
for a RemoveCharset directive similar to RemoveType
(http://httpd.apache.org/docs/mod/mod_mime.html#removetype).
Or maybe there is some other way to get the same result.
If a new directive is desirable, then let's try to hack
the Apache code or to propose it to the Apache people.
Similar of course for other server implementations.

Regards,    Martin.
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2002 02:20:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:16:59 GMT