[whatwg] Please always use utf-8 for Web Workers

Then I'm misunderstanding the suggestion then. My reading of:
"Therefore, we should be able to always use utf-8 for workers. Always using
utf-8 is simpler to implement and test and encourages people to switch to
utf-8 elsewhere."

...was "we should ignore charset headers coming from the server and always
treat script data imported via importScripts() as if it were encoded as
utf-8" (i.e. skip step 3 of section 4.3 of the web workers spec), which
seems like it's effectively changing the default decoding.

Which means that someone naively serving up an existing Big5-encoded script
(containing, say, string resources) with the appropriate charset header will
find it fails when loaded into workers.

Again, apologies if I'm misunderstanding the suggestion.

-atw

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com>wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:16:47 +0200, Drew Wilson <atwilson at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Certainly. If I explicitly override the charset, then that seems like
>> reasonable behavior.
>>
>
> It does not need to be overridden per se. If the document character
> encoding is different from UTF-8 then a script loaded through <script> will
> be decoded differently from a script loaded through importScripts() as well.
>
>
>  Having the default decoding vary between importScripts() and <script>
>> seems bad, especially since you can't override charsets with
>> importScripts().
>>
>
> This is already the case. The suggestion was not about changing the
> default.
>
>
>
> --
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090925/d2c0a816/attachment.htm>

Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 10:34:18 UTC