W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-cvs@w3.org > May 2004

[Bug 719] Doctype/encoding fallback issues

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 06:17:16 +0000
To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1BPbR6-0008Bl-MH@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=719

ville.skytta@iki.fi changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          QAContact|                            |www-validator-cvs@w3.org



------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta@iki.fi  2004-05-17 02:17 -------
Correct me if I'm wrong:

I don't know where the conflict between the specs in the situation outlined in
comment 3 is.  AFAIK, one of the specs has a "strong default", the other
(speaking HTML here, not X(HT)ML) does not have any default.  FWIW, I disagree
with bluntly acting against the HTTP spec _when not necessary_.

Anyway, we already have warnings about not being able to find a character
encoding to use in the validator code.  Why aren't those shown in this case?  In
which cases they are shown, then?

I think the warnings should be shown no matter what charset we choose if none is
explicitly specified.  In addition if we choose to use UTF-8 in these cases for
which the reasoning is not at all obvious IMO, a blurb/statement about it needs
to be included in the documentation.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Monday, 17 May 2004 02:17:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:02:06 UTC