Re: HTML5 Issue 11 (encoding detection): I18N WG response...

Henri Sivonen On 09-10-12 09.42:

> On Oct 12, 2009, at 07:14, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:

     [...]

>>  • Otherwise, return an implementation-defined or user-specified  
>> default character encoding, with the confidence tentative. Due to  
>> its widespread use as a default in legacy content, windows-1252 is  
>> recommended as a default in the absences of other information.


+1 Looks best so far, as it avoids naming any area (or myths about 
clear name for an area).

+1 for including user-specified defaults in the algorithm.

> I think it would be useful to include a table showing the locales and  
> their default encodings for the locales to which browsers  
> traditionally ship with a non-Windows-1252 default.

A list of only of non-Windows-1252 defaults sounds as a "table of 
the exceptions". Such a list should rather try to document all 
legacy encoding locale defaults there are - or could be. It 
probably should be defined by another spec, or a Wiki page.
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 11:48:40 UTC