W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: [css-syntax] CR publication, Encodings and @charset

From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:15:31 +0000
Message-ID: <52CD3353.7030705@exyr.org>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>
On 08/01/2014 09:17, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This doesn't quite address their feedback.  As currently written,
>> Syntax doesn't allow UTF-16 *either*, unless you use a BOM for the
>> Encoding Standard to pick up.  You definitely can't use @charset to
>> specify utf-16, at least as specified.
>
> And we should keep it that way :-) Just like <meta>, @charset should
> only work for ASCII-compatible encodings, which means encodings other
> than utf-16be and utf-16le (utf-16 as such is not a thing anymore per
> Encoding).


Ok. The current spec text is:

> If the return value was utf-16 or utf-16be, use utf-8 as the fallback
> encoding; if it was anything else except failure, use the return
> value as the fallback encoding.
>
> Note: This mimics HTML <meta> behavior.


How about changing this to:

> If the return value is an ASCII-incompatible encoding (Note: i.e.
> utf-16le or utf-16be), use utf-8 as the fallback encoding; if it was
> anything else except failure, use the return value as the fallback
> encoding.
>
> Note: With an ASCII-incompatible encoding, the ASCII @charset byte
> sequence itself would decode as garbage. This mimics HTML <meta>
> behavior.

in order to clarify the intent?


By the way, do we want to use the environment (a.k.a. referring 
document’s) encoding if it’s ASCII-incompatible?

-- 
Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2014 11:16:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:36 UTC