- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 22:54:42 +0900
- To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4471C2A2.1050807@w3.org>
Sorry for being late with this. +1 - Felix François Yergeau wrote: > > +1 > > Richard Ishida a écrit : >> I forgot to mention this during the call on Tuesday. I had a long >> discussion around this topic on Monday and we agreed on this >> resolution. I recommend that we accept it. >> >> I also discussed the two other outstanding issues we had and we came >> to some agreements on those. >> >> I think these changes meet our needs, and I think it will be difficult >> to get any other changes at this stage. >> >> RI >> >> >> ============ >> Richard Ishida >> Internationalization Lead >> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) >> >> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ >> http://www.w3.org/International/ >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/ >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/ >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux [mailto:dom@w3.org] Sent: 18 May 2006 >>> 16:51 >>> To: Richard Ishida >>> Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org >>> Subject: RE: [MWBP 1.0] i18n comment: Support Unicode >>> >>> Le jeudi 04 mai 2006 à 15:22 +0100, Richard Ishida a écrit : >>>> The current text, however, doesn't particularly encourage content >>>> authors to use UTF-8. On the contrary, since it talks about >>> using the >>>> value of the Accept-Charset header and is noncommittal about which >>>> encoding is being indicated using the Content-Type header and what >>>> determines the choice of encoding, it makes no clear >>> recommendation to use utf-8. >>> >>> As discussed with you in a separate thread, the BPWG has agreed to >>> amend the text under the Character Encoding section to clarify why >>> using Unicode is good choice: >>> "Encoding of the content to a desired character encoding is dependent >>> on the authoring tools being used, Web server configuration and the >>> server side scripting technology being used (if any). For a >>> discussion of this see [CHARSET1] and [CHARSET2]. >>> >>> Unicode is a good choice for representing content when served in >>> multiple languages. The amount of bandwidth required to transmit >>> content can vary significantly depending on the character encoding >>> used. Text consisting principally of characters from the Latin >>> alphabet will encode more efficiently in UTF-8, whereas text >>> consisting principally of characters from ideographic scripts will >>> encode more efficiently in UTF-16. When choosing a character >>> encoding, consider the efficiency of the available encodings. >>> >>> Since the Default Delivery Context specifies use only of UTF-8, all >>> applications should support UTF-8. >>> " >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobile-bp-20060518/#CHARACTER_ENC >> ODING_USE >>> As this came as a result of a discussion with you, we assume that you >>> are now satisfied with this resolution. >>> >>> Dom >>> >> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 22 May 2006 13:55:00 UTC