- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:31:26 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Gavin Carothers <gavin@carothers.name>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Adam Barth wrote: >> Unfortunately, a browser's content sniffing algorithm is a subtle >> beast. I would not recommend changing the algorithm because of >> aesthetics. Instead, I recommend changing the algorithm either (1) to >> improve security, (2) to improve compatibility with web content, or >> (3) to improve interoperability with other browsers. >> ... > > (2) and (3) seem to be arguments in favor of handling the UTF-8 BOM. Maybe, but maybe not. For (2), we should do a careful measurement instead of relying on this one anecdote. For (3), there's no way to chase IE's tail here without giving up on (1). Instead, I've recommended in the past (and continue to recommend) that other browsers use Firefox's HTML signature (with a handful of changes that measurability improve compatibility). Adam
Received on Monday, 23 November 2009 15:32:20 UTC