- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 07:33:17 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16157 --- Comment #4 from Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> 2012-03-16 07:33:16 UTC --- How is this different from the "draconian" error handling the XML parsers are required to do and which many people, you included, has argued strongly against. The problem with throwing for unpaired surrogates is that easy-to-make data-dependent mistakes produces very fatal results. I.e. if for example you want to send string data in smaller chunks a very easy "mistake" to make would be to simply chop up the JS-string into 10k sized chunks and send each separately. This will generally work great, however in languages which produces a lot of surrogates this will fail 50%-67% of the time. If we could make it throw consistently then I agree it would have been a more reasonable strategy. But I can't think of a way to not make this very data dependent which means that it's likely to not fail on developers machines, but fail in the real world. And yes, putting in a replacement character also results in destroyed data. However in the example stated above, having one destroyed character every 10k of data should be a low enough error rate that the message is still understandable to a human. Just like the layout errors produced by a missing end tag likely produces a page understandable to humans. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 16 March 2012 07:33:23 UTC