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

Re: Encodings on validator.w3.org/detailed.html

From: Andreas Prilop <nhtcapri@rrzn-user.uni-hannover.de>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:12:31 +0100
Message-Id: <l03130300ba16bf81909f@[130.75.116.2]>
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>

On 2002-12-06 18:29 +0100, Martin Duerst wrote:

>>>> iso-8859-4 (Baltic Rim)
>>> Should read "iso-8859-4 (North European)".
> 
> I have checked this a bit. The evidence for a change
> is certainly less than conclusive.

ISO-8859-13 is correctly and commonly called "Baltic Rim Encoding"
<http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/charset/baltic.html>
<http://ww.google.com/search?q=%22Baltic+Rim+Encoding%22>

It is therefore confusing and not appropriate to call ISO-8859-4
"Baltic Rim", too. ISO-8859-4 aka Latin-4 is a totally different
creature.


>>>> iso-8859-13 (Latin 7)"
>>> Should read "iso-8859-13 (Baltic Rim)".
> 
> There is not too much info available,

See above.


>>> You might want to add the following encodings:
>>>  iso-8859-8 (Hebrew)
> 
> Because of the bidi support in HTML, the correct charset
> for Hebrew is iso-8859-8-i.

You can use both ISO-8859-8 and ISO-8859-i:
<http://www.nirdagan.com/hebrew/standards>
<http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/hebrew.html8>

I don't see any reason why you should drop one of them. For example,
in Internet Explorer these encodings are listed under "Hebrew (Visual)"
and "Hebrew (Logical)", resp.


>>>  iso-8859-11 (Thai)
> 
> This one is not registered with IANA
> (see http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets).

You can find it at
<http://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/ISO8859/>
<ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/ISO8859/>
Received on Friday, 6 December 2002 16:12:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:05 GMT