- From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:29:05 -0700
On 3/21/2012 8:53 AM, Joshua Bell wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren<annevk at opera.com>wrote: > >> > On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 01:27:47 -0700, Jonas Sicking<jonas at sicking.cc> >> > wrote: >> > >>> >> This leaves us with 2 or 3. So the question is if we should support >>> >> streaming or not. I suspect doing so would be worth it. >>> >> >> > >> > For XMLHttpRequest it might be, yes. >> > >> > I think we should expose the same encoding set throughout the platform. >> > One reason to limit the encoding set initially might be because we have not >> > all converged yet on our encoding sets. Gecko, Safari, and Internet >> > Explorer expose a lot more encodings than Opera and Chrome. >> > > Just to throw it out there - does anyone feel we can/should offer > asymmetric encode/decode support, i.e. supporting more encodings for decode > operations than for encode operations? In the past decade I've never had to encode into something other than UTF-8. I have had to decode many encoding sets. If I did need to do a special encoding, given the state of typed arrays, I'd probably just implement the encoding in JS. +1 for asymmetric from my experience. -Charles
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 10:29:05 UTC