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

Re: Charset "iso-10646-1"

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:14:08 +0200
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
cc: John Middleton <jmiddlet@sedl.org>, www-validator@w3.org, www-html-editor@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010831101246-r01010800-919928f4-0910-010c@localhost>
[ Note: CCed all over the place. Watch were you send any replies! ]
[ The right place is probably either www-html or www-validator,   ]
[ depending on who and which issue you're replying to. :-)        ]

On 29.08.01 at 16:19, Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> wrote:

>I'm a bit confused. The place you cite does reference [ISO10646], but it
>does not contain any syntax examples. The actual syntax is given in
>Section 5, http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/charset.html, but this does
>not contain the label iso-10646-1 at all.
>
>Also, the IANA registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets
>does not contain iso-10646-1.
>
>I wonder where you came up with iso-10646-1.

It's a common misconception. Character Encoding issues are _hard_ and most
people don't understand them. Since the ISO-8859-* series has been well
worked into the collective subsconscious, if a spec uses a similar looking
string (such as "ISO-10646") anywhere in relation to charset issues, a lot
of people will immediately assume it is a charset name in the same vein as
the ISO-8859-* encodings. This has cropped up periodically and should
probably be mentioned to the HTML WG; a small explanatory note,
strategically placed, could avoid a lot of confusion.
Received on Friday, 31 August 2001 04:15:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:59 GMT