- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:12:32 +0100
- To: "Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:02:43 +0100, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote: >> If support for UTF-7 can't be removed than deprecating it will >> hardly matter. > > You're not forced to support all registered charsets today, do you > support say pc-multilingual-850+euro (a.k.a. cp00858) or any older > incarnations of "cp850" ? Likely you don't, and IMO "deprecating" > UTF-7 +/- Unicode-1-1 just offers you a reference to justify your > decision to drop it from your list of supported charsets. > > Likely you also don't support UTF-1, BOCU-1, SCSU, or UTF-EBCDIC, > what's special with UTF-7 ? Character encodings are sort of beyond what I invest my time in, but I'd expect us to support encodings that are in use (apart from UTF-32 which we support for no good reason) and not necessarily those that made it to a list. > [...] Not covering windows-1252 would be of course odd, and > I think you need Latin-1 for HTML versions before HTML I18N, but > UTF-7 isn't required (IIRC IMAP requires its own variant, that's > not the UTF-7 we're talking about). You seem to have the impression that browser treat different versions of HTML differently. It has been pointed out several times that this is not the case and I will tell you again that this is so. Browsers don't care about HTML versions. I would expect support for UTF-7 to depend on existing content. Again, I haven't done research in this area. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 17:09:02 UTC