RE: encoding and charset

At the moment, we use the charset from the content-type header of
c:body. Adding a charset attribute to c:body would, IMHO, introduce
additional issues with triplicating (?) the content type/charset
information in the content-type attribute of c:body, its possible
content-type header and the new attribute.

Regarding err:XC0010 and c:body, shouldn't the HTTP client fall back to
US-ASCII (as per HTTP 1.1) if no charset is specified?

Shouldn't err:XC0010 apply also to other steps can take c:data as input
and treat the data as text (for instance, p:xquery)?

Regards,
Vojtech

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org] On 
> Behalf Of Norman Walsh
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 4:39 PM
> To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> Subject: encoding and charset
> 
> If it's an error (err:XC0010) to specify encoding=base64 on 
> p:unescape-markup
> without also specifying a charset; should it not also be an 
> error to specify
> an encoding=base64 on a c:body without specifying a charset?
> 
> Should c:body have a charset attribute, or must the charset 
> be parsed from
> the content-type on c:body?
> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
> 
> -- 
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The real art of conversation is not
> http://nwalsh.com/            | only to say the right thing at the
>                               | right place but to leave unsaid the
>                               | wrong thing at the tempting
>                               | moment.--Dorothy Nevill
>

Received on Monday, 23 November 2009 16:04:14 UTC