W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: For review: Migrating to Unicode

From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:14:14 -0400
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Cc: www-international@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080321021414.GD28159@mercury.ccil.org>

Frank Ellermann scripsit:

> | Outgoing XML should always be encoded in UTF-8
> Maybe add "or its proper subset US-ASCII", because that avoids any
> potential problems with a text/xml Content-Type.  Maybe say this:
> "but note that US-ASCII is the default for Content-Type text/xml".

Not only the default, but a default that is only overridable in the
Content-Type header itself, not in the XML prologue.  For that reason,
text/xml should be avoided.

> | Windows-1252, an extension of ISO-8859-1
> Is "extension" strictly correct ?  Or is it only a "variation" ?

Extension is strictly correct.  ISO 8859-1 does not assign meaning to
the bytes 0x80-0x9F (the overall framework may assign them meaning as
control characters), but Windows-1252 does.  In the 0xA0-0xFF range,
they are identical.

Mos Eisley spaceport.  You will never           John Cowan
see a more wretched hive of scum and            cowan@ccil.org
villainy -- unless you watch the                http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Jerry Springer Show.   --georgettesworld.com
Received on Friday, 21 March 2008 02:14:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:29 UTC