- From: Peter O.B. Mikes <pom@llnl.gov>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 13:21:31 -0800
- To: "Martin J. Duerst" <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
- CC: Klaus Weide <kweide@tezcat.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, www-international@w3.org, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Martin J. Duerst wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Dec 1996, Klaus Weide wrote:
>
>
> > Example of a site where documents are provided in several charsets
> > (all for the same language):
> > see <URL: http://www.fee.vutbr.cz/htbin/codepage>.
>
> The list is impressive. It becomes less impressive if you realize
> that all (as far as I have checked) the English pages and some
> of the Check pages (MS Cyrillic/MS Greek/MS Hebrew,...) are just
> plain ASCII,
And even less impressive when one finds out that
not a single page Displays the 'diacritics' correctly,
even when one selects Latin-2 encoding in the Netscape 3.
Why is that? Are the experts building an Edsel?
> > It is certainly much easier to make a Web clients able to decode UTF-8
> > to locally available character sets, than to upgrade all client
> > machines so that they have fonts available to display all of the 10646
> > characters.
Besides, character set is not function of a language,
math, APL, music, all have different need for character sets
and character sets mixtures which can exceed 10646
>
> Definitely UTF-8 should be encouraged. But that's not done by
> introducing new protocol complications and requiring the servers
> to deal with unpredictable transliteration issues that can be
> dealt with more easily on the client side.
>
> Regards, Martin.
--
Peter O.B. Mikes pom@llnl.gov
http://edprog.llnl.gov/team/pom.html
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 1996 16:18:11 UTC