W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: Encoding Standard at F2F

From: Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:28:19 +0000
Cc: Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, www-international@w3.org
Message-Id: <AC695F19-E8D2-4500-9CA3-303860DD0236@norbertlindenberg.com>
To: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>

On Nov 5, 2012, at 7:34 , Martin J. Dürst wrote:

> On 2012/11/05 11:29, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> Norbert Lindenberg, Mon, 5 Nov 2012 00:11:02 +0000:
>>> - It would also be useful to check with the ICU team whether they are
>>> willing to update their converters to match the proposed
>>> specification.
>> In what way should ICU update their converters? ICU is a library - it
>> is not a user agent. Thus I don't see why it would need to remove its
>> large set of supported encodings.

ICU is a library that can be (and likely is already) used to implement user agents, so it's useful to know to what extent it would help implement the proposed specification.

> Yes, that would definitely be a bad idea. Also, changing what the encoding labels mean, in ICU as well as in other applications, would be a bad idea, because it will pull the rug under the feet of applications using ICU. But what ICU could/should do is to provide some information about which of its encodings correspond *exactly* to the ones in this spec. And in case there isn't such an encoding, create a new variant.

These are issues and solutions worth discussing.

I'm not asking the ICU team to blindly adopt the proposed specification. I'm suggesting that the people working on the specification communicate both with the implementors of user agents in general (not just browsers) and with the likely implementation providers.

Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 10:28:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:33 UTC