- From: Michel Suignard <michelsu@windows.microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:10:59 -0800
- To: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "Anne van Kesteren" <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Cc: "W3C CSS List" <www-style@w3.org>
> [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann
> Again, RFC 3987 would require that
>
> @charset "iso-8859-1";
> element { background-image: url(Bjo\000308rn) }
>
> yields in a request for Bj%C3%B6rn and that
>
> @charset "utf-8";
> element { background-image: url(Bjo\000308rn) }
>
> yields in a request for Bjo%CC%88rn.
>
> Both are "UTF-8" but differ in their Unicode Normalization.
> Some CSS implementations do the latter but few if any
> implementations do the former which is not surprising as that
> would be inconsistent with a number of specifications.
Note that RFC 3987 NFC normalization is a 'SHOULD'. So strictly speaking the first value is conformant. It is recommended to use NFC (see the RFC section 5.3.2.2) because it will facilitate identity matching. Not putting the NFC normalization requirement on a spec using IRI (de facto or de jure) is really just hurting that spec.
Michel
Received on Monday, 21 March 2005 18:11:05 UTC