RE: For review: Character encodings in HTML and CSS

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Halvard Silli [mailto:xn--mlform-iua@målform.no]
> Sent: 11 February 2010 15:43
> To: Richard Ishida
> Cc: www-international@w3.org
> Subject: Re: For review: Character encodings in HTML and CSS
> 
> Richard Ishida, Tue, 9 Feb 2010 13:20:29 -0000:
> > Comments are being sought on this article prior to final release.
> > Please send any comments to this list (www-international@w3.org). We
> > expect to publish a final version in one to two weeks.
> >
> > See http://www.w3.org/International/tutorials/tutorial-char-enc/temp
> 
> Two more commentaries:
> 
> 	1) The article talks about "to be <em>encoded</em> as Unicode":
> 
> ]] Note that this does not mean that all HTML and XML documents have to
> be <em>encoded</em> as Unicode! [[
> 
> - "encoded as Unicode" gives me the impression that Unicode can be
> considered an encoding. Whereas for the most part the article
> emphasizes that - quote: "Unicode is  a universal character set".
> Would it not be better to say "encoded _in_a_Unicode_encoding_"? (In
> line with the heading "Consider using a Unicode encoding".)

Changed to "Note that this does not mean that all HTML and XML documents
have to use a Unicode encoding!" 


> 
> 	2) W.r.t. the heading "Consider using a Unicode encoding":
> 
> - would it not be ideal if the text under that heading listed or linked
> to the [relevant] Unicode encodings? Currently the Unicode encodings
> are listed under the heading "One character set, multiple encodings",
> which says: "The encoding forms that can be used with Unicode are
> called UTF-8, UTF-16, and UTF-32."

Done.


> --
> leif halvard silli
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2680 - Release Date: 02/10/10
> 19:38:00

Received on Friday, 19 February 2010 09:00:13 UTC