Re: [whatwg/encoding] Non-browser versus JavaScript (#87)

I think it's good for Node.js to expose browser-compatible interfaces and to some extent it's probably good to consider Node.js when deciding things that could go either way on browsers but one way is clearly preferable on Node.js, but I think it's a somewhat slippery slope in terms of scope creep for the WHATWG to officially start considering non-Web client software to be in scope.

I'm particularly worried about an increase in stated scope resulting in a) requests to expose non-UTF-8 encoders (see the previous comment) and this spilling over to browsers and b) requests to add encodings for non-Web client use cases and this spilling over to browsers.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/encoding/issues/87#issuecomment-274437231