- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:05:02 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > ... > The present design looks pretty fragile and complex; the cost > of everybody dealing with it going forward would seem to be > higher than the cost of breaking the pages that depend on it... > but maybe not... authors and developers of new stuff can > avoid the complexity by sticking to utf-8, I suppose. Hmm. > ... Well, sort of. Of course it seems to be a good idea anyway to encode pages in UTF-8. However, there may be reasons not to (Asian languages anyone???), and at least in theory some intermediate could recode the page (it's a text/* mime type after all). Page producers always can avoid problems for the HTML URLs they send by using percent-escaped UTF-8, making the "HTML URLs" proper RFC3986 (all ASCII) URIs. It gets really interesting only with form submission, where it's the browser that's constructing the query part. I really wish we had a way to force the browser to use UTF-8, *no matter* what the page encoding is. And no, for now that doesn't need to be a default. An opt-in, such as a new attribute on the form element, could be totally sufficient for now. BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 27 June 2008 18:05:46 UTC