Re: [XHR] responseType "json"

In the example you give, there is consistency between the content metadata
(charset param) and the content itself (as determined by sniffing). So why
would both the metadata and content be ignored?

If there were an inconsistency (but there isn't) then [1] would apply, in
which case the metadata can't be ignored without user consent.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#metadata-inconsistencies

In any case, what is suggested below would be a direct violation of [2] as
well.

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#C030

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:

> * Glenn Adams wrote:
> >What do you mean by "treat content that clearly is UTF-32 as
> >UTF-16-encoded"? Do you mean interpreting it as a sequence of unsigned
> >shorts? That would be a direct violation of the semantics of UTF-32, would
> >it not?
>
> Consider you have
>
>  ...
>  Content-Type: example/example;charset=utf-32
>
>  FF FE 00 00 ...
>
> Some would like to treat this as UTF-16 encoded document starting with
> U+0000 after the Unicode signature, even though it clearly is UTF-32.
> --
> Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
> 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
>