W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: For review: 6 new and 2 updated articles about character encoding

From: Gunnar Bittersmann <gunnar@bittersmann.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:36:43 +0200
Message-ID: <4C6C0C1B.3020107@bittersmann.de>
To: www-international@w3.org
I finally got through the last two of the articles, so here we go.

under XHTML 1.x served as XML:

despite the already reported encoding pseudo-attribute:

“Ensure there is nothing before it, including spaces.”

Hm, a BOM might occur befor the XML declaration. Should that be 
mentioned in that place?

There’s a '?' missing in the XML declaration, make it:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

under Disadvantages:

“…on the server - especially when dealing…”

Use a dash, not a hyphen: on the server – especially when dealing

under Using the XML declaration for XHTML served as HTML:

“This would make the top of the above file look like this:”

This is confusing to me. What above file? That one that was encoded in 

Proposal: This would make the top of a file look like this:

In the code example:

Capitalize ISO-8859-1 (for consistency reasons). It is in capitals in 
the next code example in the article and in the IANA registry.

Close the 'meta' element with '/>':
<meta http-equiv="Content-type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1"/>



“Documents should not use UTF-32, […]
The specification also advises against the use of UTF-32.”

Duplicate content.

I somehow miss the advice against a BOM in UTF-8. (The Dreamweaver 
screenshot even shows the option “Include Unicode Signature (BOM)”.) Is 
it out of the scope of this article?

Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2010 16:37:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:40:58 UTC