From: Seething13@webtv.net (§ee†hing¹³) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:26:20 -0400 (EDT) To: www-validator@w3.org Message-ID: <7581-3B73EF0C-82@storefull-224.iap.bryant.webtv.net> Subject: Re: ISO-10646 in HTML 4.01 Please explain what you mean by what tools did I use to make my page. Actually, it's a whole website, but I'm just now getting around to validating and "tidying" the code up so it will run smoothly. If you mean what HTML editor, I do not believe in such cheating. I write ALL my html code by hand. (well, I do copy parts from my previously saved work, LOL! ....and I steal from other people, like my boyfriend a lot!) Is that what you meant? Why do you ask, am I making any terrible errors? I read just about every decent tutorial on the internet, and I TRY to keep up with the trends as much as possible (Things move so fast though...ya know?) Regards, Seething PS, when I put that new charset on my front page, and tried the w3 validator, it said "unknown character on line 87 for this charset" So I don't know what to do......that part of the page is a HTML fragment from a webring (The Expert_HTML webring, GO FIGURE! LOL), and NOT my coding....I tried to fix it up (GOD it had TERRIBLE coding misatkes) but I have no idea what character it is referring to.....all I saw was alpha-numerical coding in the thing.
attached mail follows:
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20010810103945.009dc870@133.27.195.38> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:40:34 +0900 To: Seething13@webtv.net($B%!(Bee$B+I(Bing$B%1%&() From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> Cc: www-validator@w3.org Subject: Re: ISO-10646 in HTML 4.01 What tools did you use for your page? Regards, Martin. p.s. copying back to the validator list At 20:20 01/08/09 -0400, $B%!(Bee$B+I(Bing$B%1%&(B wrote: >Thanks for the reply, so your suggestion is to use utf-8 for my site? > >When you say to make sure I know which one I am using....how would I go >about figuring that out? That's what I was hoping someone on this list >could help me with! > >Thanks, > >Seething > >Received: from smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.96) by > storefull-156.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 > 20:51:29 -0700 (PDT) >Received: by smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) id A9C8020B; > Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:51:31 -0700 (PDT) >Delivered-To: seething13@webtv.net >Received: from sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp [133.27.195.38]) > by smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP id > AA4B1148 for <Seething13@webtv.net>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:51:30 > -0700 (PDT) >Received: from enoshima (g052163.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp [211.132.52.163]) by > sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id MAA09779; Thu, 9 > Aug 2001 12:51:06 +0900 (JST) >Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20010809123333.02d59560@133.27.195.38> >X-Sender: duerst@133.27.195.38 >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58.J >Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 12:50:01 +0900 >To: Seething13@webtv.net, www-validator@w3.org >From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> >Subject: Re: ISO-10646 in HTML 4.01 >In-Reply-To: <8815-3B7202BA-1193@storefull-155.iap.bryant.webtv.net> >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"; format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Hello Seething, > >First, ISO 10646 is the *document character set* for HTML and XML. >What that means is that any HTML or XML processor is supposed to >behave as if it thought in ISO 10646 (aka Unicode), independent >of how this is implemented. > >ISO 10646 as such (with or without hyphen, upper or lower case) is >not a 'charset' (or character encoding), i.e. it does not define how >to map from characters to bytes (or more importantly and correctly, >from bytes to characters). > >Character encodings that cover all of iso 10646/Unicode are e.g. >utf-8 and utf-16. But your page doesn't seem to contain anything >outside us-ascii, and so you could even use charset=us-ascii. >utf-8 is upwards compatible to that, so you could also use utf-8. > >There is no single one-and-only character encoding on the Web. >The most important things are that: >- You choose one this is used widely (us-ascii, utf-8, iso-8859-1,...) >- You make sure that you know what you actually use >- You make sure that you label your pages correctly. > >You will have to make very similar decisions for XHTML, so there >is no waste of time if you think about it now. > >Regards, Martin. > >At 23:25 01/08/08 -0400, $B%!(Bee$B+I(Bing$B%1%&(B wrote: >>Hello, I am currently trying to bring my site up to specs, and I have >>the following meta tag on my page. Your validator does not seem to >>support this charset, yet on your site you specify that THIS IS the most >>current charset and is recommended. What I need to know is, am I doing >>this correctly, because I copied this code from a reputable help >>website, yet it seems to cause a validation error (Shouldn't it all be >>in lower case?). Is ISO-10646 the current recommended charset for >>HTML4.01 documents written in American English? >> >><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ISO-10646"> >> >>I believe for now, I will remove the charset tag completely.....since I >>do not know which charset to use! Advice would be greatly appreciated! >>Here is my URL: http://www.seething13.com >>It is very hard to find easy to understand info on this topic, and I am >>dead set on writing a tutorial for other to refer to once I figure it >>all out! This is very frustrating! OH, and what's this about XHTML 1.0? >>Should I even BOTHER trying to conform to HTML 4.01 if XHTML 1.0 is >>going to replace it soon? I'm sorry to ask so much but I HAVE been >>surfing your site for 3 days now and still have not found the answers I >>am looking for. >> >>Many thanks, >> >>Seething >