- From: Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 09:03:52 -0600
- To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:48 AM, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com> wrote: > On 08/07/2012 07:51 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > I don't mind supporting *decoding* from basically any encoding that >> Anne's spec enumerates. I don't see a downside with that since I >> suspect most implementations will just call into a generic decoding >> backend anyway, and so supporting the same set of encodings as for >> other parts of the platform should be relatively easy. >> > > [...] > > > However I think we should consider restricting support to a smaller >> set of encodings for while *encoding*. There should be little reason >> for people today to produce text in non-utf formats. We might even be >> able to get away with only supporting UTF8, though I wouldn't be >> surprised if there are reasonably modern file formats which use utf16. >> > > FWIW, I agree with the decode-from-all-platform-**encodings > encode-to-utf[8|16] position. > Any disagreement on limiting the supported encodings to utf-8, utf-16, and utf-16be, while permitting decoding of all encodings in the Encoding spec? (This eliminates the "what to do on encoding error" issue nicely, still need to resolve the BOM issue though.)
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2012 15:04:31 UTC