- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:02:48 +0100
- To: www-international@w3.org
John Cowan wrote: >> | Windows-1252, an extension of ISO-8859-1 >> Is "extension" strictly correct ? Or is it only a "variation" ? > Extension is strictly correct. ISO 8859-1 does not assign meaning > to the bytes 0x80-0x9F (the overall framework may assign them > meaning as control characters), but Windows-1252 does. That's odd, isn't it ? When I use iso-8859-1 as Content-Type I certainly want more than only the minimal C0 set with ESC. I'm going to use CR and LF (and maybe HT, FF, and others) without explicitly invoking a "non-minimal" C0 set. I also assume that it's ECMA 43 level 1 without SS2 and SS3, let alone any level 3 locking shifts. I never tried to invoke a G2 or G3 within a document claiming to be iso-8859-1. Frank
Received on Saturday, 22 March 2008 11:01:00 UTC