W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2004

Re: [CSS21] response to issue 115 (and 44)

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:52:14 +0100
Message-ID: <384283187.20040219005214@w3.org>
To: "Rijk van Geijtenbeek" <rijk@opera.com>
Cc: "WWW Style" <www-style@w3.org>

On Thursday, February 19, 2004, 12:27:49 AM, Rijk wrote:

RvG> Mozilla refused to use the stylesheet for www.opera.com for a
RvG> while, because the webmaster had put a comment in it... in
RvG> Norwegian, using the a-ring character. The stylesheet was send as
RvG> Latin-1,

You mean it was served as

Content-Type: text/css;charset=iso-8859-1

or do you mean

the default for unlabelled text content over HTTP is Latin-1 in some
versions of the HTTP spec

RvG> but didn't contain charset info, and the referring page
RvG> was utf-8.

RvG> Clear rules on how to handle such a case have their use, I think.

The need for clear rules is indeed why I am participating in this

I would say that the primary fault there was with Opera for serving
content on a text/css media type without looking at the text/* rules
for missing charset/encoding information (if they used an assumed

The secondary fault is with the CSS spec for encouraging the
indirected, referring page hueristic.

Mozilla was spec compliant in refusing the stylesheet, I would say, if
it lacked charset labelling.

However, if the stylesheet was served with an explicit charset
parameter, or had an explicit @charset, then Mozilla was incorrect to
refuse the stylesheet or to interpret it as UTF-8.

 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2004 18:52:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:11 UTC