Re: [whatwg/encoding] Consider adding windows-936-2000 as a label for GBK (Issue #295)

I'm not against this.

However, if we're adding more labels, I think there's probably more opportunity for benefit from supporting Java 1 encoding names. See https://searchfox.org/comm-central/source/mailnews/intl/charsetalias.properties and the java.io column at https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/intl/encoding.doc.html

Particular categories of labels that are relevant to consider:

* ISO-8859 series labels of the form `iso8859_N` where `N` is the part number, e.g. `iso8859_1`.
* Code pages shared by Windows and DOS with the `ms` prefix. Of these, `ms932` was already added as an ad hoc special case.
* Code pages shared by Windows and DOS with the `cp` prefix.
* Underscore versions of Unix CJK encodings: euc_cn, big5_hkscs, etc. My vague recollection is that Presto-era Opera found EUC_JP not to be Web-compatible due to Shift_JIS content labeled as EUC_JP. However, it's been long enough that my memory may be generating false recollections of Web compat problems.



-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/encoding/issues/295#issuecomment-1262254963
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/encoding/issues/295/1262254963@github.com>