- From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 09:53:28 -0800
- To: Chris Lilley <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>
- CC: Alan Barrett/DUB/Lotus <Alan_Barrett/DUB/Lotus.LOTUSINT@crd.lotus.com>, www-international <www-international@w3.org>, bobj <bobj@netscape.com>, wjs <wjs@netscape.com>, Ed Batutis/CAM /Lotus <Ed_Batutis/CAM/Lotus@crd.lotus.com>
> What I was trying to convey was that we had talked ourselves round to > agreeing that Accept-Charset was essential otherwise how does the server > know what to send? Well, I see your point. I will neither agree nor disagree at this point. We are currently discussing Accept-Charset here at Netscape. Some of our team members are also reading this email. Hopefully, some of them will respond. In response to other mail on this list, I am completely unconvinced that UI is needed for Accept-Charset. I am also concerned about "q". For Unicode, it might mean giving a low "q" since most environments cannot support *all* of Unicode. Also, the bit mask idea was just that: an idea. I'm not religiously bound to it. Over and out for now... Erik
Received on Thursday, 5 December 1996 12:54:12 UTC