Re:

 Dear Jonathan Jeon ,

The Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group has reviewed the comments you
sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the W3C mobileOK Basic
Tests 1.0 (2nd Last Call) published on 25 May 2007. Thank you for having
taken the time to review the document and to send us comments!

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below, and has
been implemented in the new version of the document available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20070928/.

Please review it carefully and let us know if you agree with it or not
before 19 October 2007. In case of disagreement, you are requested to
provide a specific solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working
Group. If such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the
opportunity to raise a formal objection which will then be reviewed by the
Director during the transition of this document to the next stage in the
W3C Recommendation Track.

Thanks,

For the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group,
Dominique Hazaël-Massieux
Michael(tm) Smith
W3C Staff Contacts

 1. http://www.w3.org/mid/20070719100459.2520D13AC4@seamus.w3.org
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20070525/


=====

Your comment on 3.3 CHARACTER_ENCODING_SUPPORT and CHARACTER_ENCODING_USE:
> 3.3 CHARACTER_ENCODING_SUPPORT and CHARACTER_ENCODING_USE
> 
> The DDC is defined to support only UTF-8 encoding, which means that
> this test fails if a resource cannot be encoded in UTF-8. It is
> reasonable to recommend that default character encoding should use
> UTF-8. But it is not good that all of another character encoding except
> UTF-8 should be FAIL.
> 
> In many cases, if some country does not use English as a native
> language, they are using various character encoding schemes. For
> example, EUC is a multibyte character encoding system used primarily
> for Japanese, Korean, and simplified Chinese. The EUC-KR and
> EUC-JP(ISO-2022) encoding is heavily used in Korea and Japan.  [1] 
> 
>  UTF-8 is not widely used in Korea. EUC-KR is more popular character
> encoding scheme in Korea (maybe more than 90% of Wired and Mobile web
> contents). It is the most widely used legacy character encoding in
> Korea on all three major platforms. Therefore, if we support only
> UTF-8, more than 90% of sites and contents will be ‘FAIL’. 
> 
> So, it is proposed to consider additional character encodings.  It is
> proposed to modify the section 3.3 as below: 
> 
> PROPOSED TEXT:
> ------------------------
> If the HTTP Content-Type header specifies a character encoding:
>    If character encoding is default-character-encoding, PASS
>    If character encoding is not default-character-encoding, warn
> If the HTTP Content-Type header does not specify a character encoding:
>    If there is no XML declaration, or default character encoding or any
> character encoding is not specified in the XML declaration, FAIL
> If the HTTP Content-Type header specifies an Internet media type
> starting with "text/":
>   If there is no meta element with http-equiv attribute that specifies
> default character encoding or any character encoding, FAIL
> If character encoding is specified in more than one way, and not all
> values are the same, FAIL
> If the document is not valid default character encoding or any
> character encoding (see 2.3.9 Validity), FAIL
> For each resource specified by 2.3.6 Included Resources:
> Request the resource
>   If the HTTP Content-Type header value of the response starts with
> "text/" but does not specify default character encoding or any
> character encoding character encoding, warn
> PASS
> ------------------------
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-bpwg/2007Jul/0047.html


Working Group Resolution:
mobileOK Basic does not require use of UTF-8 in all cases; the test only
verifies that you *can* use UTF-8 when requested. At this point we are not
in a position to revise the DDC description in Mobile Web Best Pratices,
and mobileOK Basic is intended to reflect what is in MWBP. It is useful to
encourage all sites to support globally-interoperable encodings like UTF-8,
even if they also support a more appropriate local encoding.

----

Received on Thursday, 4 October 2007 15:28:17 UTC