Re: DRAFT comment on 3023-bis [from Henry]

Forwarding HT's email about 3023bis to the list.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: DRAFT comment on 3023-bis
Date: 	Wed, 02 Oct 2013 16:31:04 +0100
From: 	ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
To: 	Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>



...things that
arose while discharging my old action to update the Test Suite made
clear that there is a gap in 3023bis arising from the following in
Appendix F (and from things left unsaid in 4.3.3):

   F.2 Priorities in the Presence of External Encoding Information

   The second possible case occurs when the XML entity is accompanied
   by encoding information, as in some file systems and some network
   protocols. When multiple sources of information are available, their
   relative priority and the preferred method of handling conflict
   should be specified as part of the higher-level protocol used to
   deliver XML. In particular, please refer to [IETF RFC 3023] or its
   successor, which defines the text/xml and application/xml MIME types
   and provides some useful guidance.

I'm not yet ready to put draft prose before the WG which I propose to
include in 3023bis to discharge the above hand-off of responsibility
(there's nothing there now), although I believe (and the TAG has just
tentatively agreed) that the answer will be to say

   1) If there's a BOM, it's authoritative (i.e. ignore the charset);
   2) If there's no BOM, the charset is authoritative.

ht
-- 
        Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
       10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                        URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
  [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]