- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 01:38:11 +0200
- To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Cc: www-international <www-international@w3.org>
John Cowan, Wed, 8 Jun 2011 16:28:19 -0400: > Leif Halvard Silli scripsit: > >> So, really, I don't know if Firefox uses your algorithm for the >> file:// protocol. All I know is that its *parser* fails to retun >> 'fatal error' when the BOM and the declaration differ. Based on the >> XML parsers I have used recently (Webkit, Gecko, Opera, 'oXygen XML >> editor', 'XMLmind XML editor'), it is the *exception* (only Webkit >> does it) Error: Webkit also does it. (Instead Webkit is unique [sic] in showing fatal error when there there is BOM in combination with an unknown charset name in the encoding declaration.) >> rather than the rule, that file protocol parsing returns >> "fatal error" whenever encoding declaration differs from the BOM. > > That's clearly a bug, then. If the encoding declaration is *not* UTF-8, > then the BOM is not a BOM at all, but characters preceding the XML > declaration. That means the input is not well formed. Even the RXP parser [1], which seems to be used in production of the XML test suite, [2] have that bug. Which indicates that the test suite does not have basic encoding tests. Well, searching for your name on the list of test contributors, I at least found *one* test of an invalid encoding declaration. [3] :-) Namely file 'E61.xml'. [1] http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/rxp.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2008Sep/0000 [3] http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/xmlconf-20080827 -- Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 23:38:40 UTC