- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:01:51 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13392 --- Comment #7 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-07-28 14:01:50 UTC --- Of course: HTTP charset from the server can override not only a undeclared encoding but also a declared encoding. The same is also the case for HTML parsers. The issue that some (seemingly *most*) parsers give preference to the BOM over the HTTP charset, the meta charset element *and* the XML encoding declaration, is not limited to HTML parsers but is also the case for most XML parsers. This needs to be fixed in the parsers or in the HTTP spec(s). However, the reason for promoting the BOM as preferred were not related to that bug/feature (which only were discovered after the text "(preferred)" was added) but to the fact that the BOM is the only in-the-file method that applies to both XML and HTML files. This is a fact that IMHO deserves good justification if you say it should be looked away from. Henri earlier said that Polyglot Markup should be a authored to be a specs subset and not a browsers subset. (My rewording.) From that p.o.v. there should be no problems with promoting the BOM: It *is* the subset of both specs when it comes to in-the-file enc decl. PS: Conforming XML parsers such as Firefox, Opera and Xmllint (from Libxml2) do not permit changing the encoding from that of the declared (or default) one to another one. For Webkit browsers and IE, the same behavior is currently linked to the use of the BOM (and, at least for Webkits, this is is the case for both HTML and XML). This is what I had in mind when in comment #1 I said that this is an, quote "XML-like feature in itself". -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 14:01:52 UTC