W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Embarrassing typo!

From: Kathleen Anderson <kathleen@spiderwebwoman.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:55:17 -0400
Message-ID: <009b01c0ca73$15abbc00$13d5fc40@kathleen>
To: "Terje Bless" <link@tss.no>, "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Cc: "'gerald et al.'" <www-validator@w3.org>
I believe Jukka can be found at:  http://www.malibutelecom.com/yucca/

~ Kathleen Anderson
Spider Web Woman Designs
email: kathleen@spiderwebwoman.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terje Bless" <link@tss.no>
To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Cc: "'gerald et al.'" <www-validator@w3.org>
Sent: April 21, 2001 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: Embarrassing typo!

> On 20.04.01 at 23:09, Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com> wrote:
> >On 20.04.01 at 22:31, Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov> wrote:
> >
> >>Terje:  I assume you don't mind two copies?
> Nope. I like to think I have better filters then Gerald -- he uses some
> dinky UNIX mailer while I use the email client for _real_ men: Mailsmith
> from Bare Bones Software <URL:http://www.barebones.com/> on Mac OS :-) --
> but I probably just have more time to burn. :-|
> >>[...] The W3C validator doesn't support [iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1]
> >>and erroneous reports a "fatal error". That charset is valid and
> >>registered, reference [IANA].
> >
> >I'm not sure what the charset "iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1" really is.
> >Because it was registered at IANA and "windows-1252" was not, many people
> >believed that "iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1" was the official name for
> >"windows-1252".  I'm not sure if this belief is really correct,
> >since "windows-1252" has since been registered separately at IANA.
> >
> >The WDG HTML Validator treats "iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1" as an
> >for "windows-1252" at the moment, but I may remove
> >"iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1" support altogether since I'm not sure
> >that it is equivalent to windows-1252.
> I'm thinking I'll add it. I need to make a general charset-aliasing
> function and this might make a good test case. Since I don't forsee any
> problems with making iso-8859-1-Windows-3.1-Latin-1 an alias for
> windows-1252 I might as well put it in and leave it there.
> That charset is _definitely_ not widely used and I think treating it
> (perhaps erroneously) as an alias for windows-1252 is less destructive
> reporting a fatal error. I've been meaning to write some documentation
> reccomending UTF-8 in any case. :-)
> (
>     BTW, does anyone know where Jukka's writings are at these days
>     (post hut.fi)? Didn't he have some fairly comprehensive writings
>     on charset issues?
> )
> More worrying is the fact that we don't catch ISO-8859-1 in documents
> labelled as US-ASCII (see TODO #1 <URL:http://validator.w3.org/todo.html>)
> and I don't quite know why. Do any of you (Liam, Nick? Anyone?) have any
> ideas? What does Page Valet and the WDG Validator (and A Real Validator
> that matter) do with that doc?
Received on Saturday, 21 April 2001 10:56:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:29 UTC