W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Please change validator pages to UTF-8

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:04:42 -0400
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20030707110202.045b78e0@localhost>
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>, W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>

Hello Terje,

I think there is a difference between using UTF-8 throughout
and using fancy characters which get a bit easier when using Unicode.
I think we should do the former now, while the later may easily
wait way past 0.7. I do not think that simply marking something
as UTF-8 should cause any problems on Netscape 3.x (but it's
a long time since I last used that browser).

Regards,  Martin.

At 21:03 03/07/04 +0200, Terje Bless wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> wrote:
>
> >I was quite surprised to see that the main validator page (and probably
> >others) are still iso-8859-1 (see e.g.
> >http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/view.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%
> >2Fvalidator. w3.org%2F). This leads to problems when validating IRIs
> >and, once we support that, IDNs.
> >
> >All validator output is UTF-8, and there is no reason to have the input
> >be something else.
>
>Well, that's a good point; but the main reason the pages are still iso-8859-1
>is that older browsers had trouble with UTF-8. This was also the reason for
>nuking some "fancy quotes" scattered around the site.
>
>What I've been thinking is that 0.6.x should keep compatibility with these
>browsers -- which is Netscape 3.x, _not_ 4.x, BTW :-) -- and then revisit the
>issue for 0.7. Most likely -- unless I'm persuaded otherwise again -- 0.7 will
>be all UTF-8 and freely making use of "Unicode" features (such as the
>mentioned typographical quote marks).
>
>
>Part of the reason for this is that around 0.7 we need to take a long hard
>look at what backwards compatibility we want to invest resources in
>supporting; as well as what width of platforms to support. e.g. how old
>"standard" linux distros do we want to support, and whether or not we want to
>support Win32; in which case we need to actually resolve all the issues with
>that platform. Win32 in particular is difficult since we don't have a working
>SGML/XML Parser on that platform. Bj旦rn has made quite a bit of progress on
>that, but I don't know how much time/opportunity he has to keep working at it
>(and it's a bear of task too).
>
>( BTW, Bj旦rn, I can probably arrange for access to a Win32 box with the 
>Visual
>Foo tools for you if that would help. )
>
>- --
>Ladies and gentlemen, you must resist those all-too-human feelings and decide
>this case on the evidence.    And the evidence plainly shows that Mr. Landa's
>injuries,   disfiguring as they are,  are nowhere near as important to a free
>society as the fundamental right to make smart-ass remarks.   -- Katie @ AtAT
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2
>
>iQA/AwUBPwXPb6PyPrIkdfXsEQIXwQCaA7e5raaXAl5yT/688Vbcd2TPWGYAoICt
>ddaM3yM7PY30zlRDDwNb1UGW
>=/LI0
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 7 July 2003 11:05:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:09 GMT