- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:54:53 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org, Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com, xml-names-editor@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
On Friday, November 29, 2002, 5:28:06 PM, Richard wrote: RT> When I said in my previous message: RT> The current namespace draft states that in a namespace declaration, RT> the IRI reference is the normalized value of the attribute. RT> I should have made it clear that I meant the current working group RT> draft, not the published last-call draft. I posted the relevant parts RT> in: RT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2002Nov/0038.html Thanks for the pointer. RT> (The non-ascii characters are messed up in the archive of course.) <rant subject="mime charset parameter considered harmful"> Not necessarily 'of course' - see for example http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Nov/0202.html where the non-ascii characters are correct. But yes, that only happens if the mail is encoded in iso-8859-1, because our list server blindly assumes that all html is in 8859-1 and sends out damaging and frequently incorrect charset parameters. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fwww-tag%2F2002Nov%2F0202.html Which it has to do because of the silly rules on text/* media types where the charset parameter is omittted. application/xhtml+xml will fix that, unless they add a charset parameter to that, too, instead of using the xml encoding declaration as the single and unique source of encoding information. </rant> -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Monday, 2 December 2002 08:55:04 UTC