- From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:24:14 -0600
- To: Jacob Davies <jacob@well.com>
- Cc: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, Pete Cordell <petejson@codalogic.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>, "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 09:18:48AM -0800, Jacob Davies wrote: > The Finns can be verified to exist (or at least are a very convincing > hoax), but I think there is a real question whether anyone actually > uses anything other than UTF-8 with JSON. If nobody does, then support > for UTF-16 and UTF-32 autodetection is pointless and at least > potentially dangerous or buggy in the way that such features tend to > be. There are human cultures with which we don't have enough contact to learn their languages. This is silly. We must not forbid the use of any other encodings than UTF-8. We must encourage the use of UTF-8 for interop by, for example, stating that only UTF-8 is known to interop well. We must not require encoding detection functionality in parsers. We must not forbid it either. We might need to say that encodings other than UTF-8/16/32 may not be reliably detected, therefore they are highly discouraged, even forbidden except where protocols specifically call for them. But really, we can't forbid the use of UTF-16/32, we can only require parser support for UTF-8. Nico --
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2013 17:24:39 UTC