- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:52:33 +0000
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>
On 08/01/2014 11:43, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Simon Sapin<simon.sapin@exyr.org> wrote: >> 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. > This text seems fine, modulo that utf-16 should be utf-16le and you > then want to reorder them to sort them. > > >>> Note: With an ASCII-incompatible encoding, the ASCII @charset byte >>> sequence itself would decode as garbage. This mimics HTML <meta> >>> behavior. > This new note seems fine. I would clarify ASCII-incompatible as > meaning utf-16be or utf-16le within the note as the term > ASCII-incompatible is not a normative thing and keep the original > normative text plus the clarification I mentioned above. Done: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/8727915cff06#l2.1 -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2014 11:53:14 UTC