- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 14:44:02 +0000
- To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17859
--- Comment #16 from mark@macchiato.com ---
That's a good point (although I'm not sure about 99% being a good cutoff
point). But it is hard to say without knowing what kinds of considerations were
factors in the data for the original table.
Part of the problem is that there is a fair amount of slightly damaged UTF-8
out in the wild, or cases where an ad on the page has a different encoding than
the main text (a bad include). If the test is simply whether the page is
completely valid UTF-8, then a suboptimal decision might be made.
Of course, if these are only guidelines, then it doesn't matter too much.
{phone}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 9 March 2013 14:44:07 UTC