W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2002

Re: Posted draft of URI comparison finding

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:54:53 +0100
Message-ID: <18341394875.20021202145453@w3.org>
To: www-tag@w3.org, Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
CC: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com, xml-names-editor@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org

On Friday, November 29, 2002, 5:28:06 PM, Richard wrote:


RT> When I said in my previous message:

RT>   The current namespace draft states that in a namespace declaration,
RT>   the IRI reference is the normalized value of the attribute.

RT> I should have made it clear that I meant the current working group
RT> draft, not the published last-call draft.  I posted the relevant parts
RT> in:

RT>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2002Nov/0038.html

Thanks for the pointer.

RT> (The non-ascii characters are messed up in the archive of course.)

<rant subject="mime charset parameter considered harmful">
Not necessarily 'of course' - see for example
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Nov/0202.html
where the non-ascii characters are correct.

But yes, that only happens if the mail is encoded in iso-8859-1,
because our list server blindly assumes that all html is in 8859-1 and
sends out damaging and frequently incorrect charset parameters.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fwww-tag%2F2002Nov%2F0202.html

Which it has to do because of the silly rules on text/* media types
where the charset parameter is omittted.

application/xhtml+xml will fix that, unless they add a charset
parameter to that, too, instead of using the xml encoding declaration
as the single and unique source of encoding information.
</rant>

-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Monday, 2 December 2002 08:55:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:14 GMT