Re: [w3c/manifest] Manifest name: USVString or not? (Issue #1228)

domfarolino left a comment (w3c/manifest#1228)

> I'm not sure if using USVString does that, or we would have to say we do that?

Assuming the "mess up" is caused by unpaired surrogates, then yes that's exactly what USVString does. It replaces all unpaired surrogates with the [replacement character / question mark looking thing](https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+FFFD).

> Is that the norm for using a USVString? where you want to sanitize it for UX reasons?

Absolutely. https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/#idl-string-types

----

It sounds like we really want to process as with USVStrings instead of DOMStrings, especially now that there's real-world implementers confirming issues with the latter. Do you agree @marcoscaceres?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/1228#issuecomment-5304092883
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/1228/5304092883@github.com>