Re: ISO-10646 in HTML 4.01

What tools did you use for your page?  Regards,   Martin.

p.s. copying back to the validator list

At 20:20 01/08/09 -0400, $B%!(Bee$B+I(Bing$B%1%&(B wrote:
>Thanks for the reply, so your suggestion is to use utf-8 for my site?
>
>When you say to make sure I know which one I am using....how would I go
>about figuring that out? That's what I was hoping someone on this list
>could help me with!
>
>Thanks,
>
>Seething
>
>Received: from smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.96) by
>         storefull-156.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Wed, 8 Aug 2001
>         20:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: by smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) id A9C8020B;
>         Wed,  8 Aug 2001 20:51:31 -0700 (PDT)
>Delivered-To: seething13@webtv.net
>Received: from sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp [133.27.195.38])
>         by smtpin-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP id
>         AA4B1148 for <Seething13@webtv.net>; Wed,  8 Aug 2001 20:51:30
>         -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from enoshima (g052163.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp [211.132.52.163]) by
>         sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id MAA09779; Thu, 9
>         Aug 2001 12:51:06 +0900 (JST)
>Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20010809123333.02d59560@133.27.195.38>
>X-Sender: duerst@133.27.195.38
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58.J
>Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 12:50:01 +0900
>To: Seething13@webtv.net, www-validator@w3.org
>From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
>Subject: Re: ISO-10646 in HTML 4.01
>In-Reply-To: <8815-3B7202BA-1193@storefull-155.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hello Seething,
>
>First, ISO 10646 is the *document character set* for HTML and XML.
>What that means is that any HTML or XML processor is supposed to
>behave as if it thought in ISO 10646 (aka Unicode), independent
>of how this is implemented.
>
>ISO 10646 as such (with or without hyphen, upper or lower case) is
>not a 'charset' (or character encoding), i.e. it does not define how
>to map from characters to bytes (or more importantly and correctly,
>from bytes to characters).
>
>Character encodings that cover all of iso 10646/Unicode are e.g.
>utf-8 and utf-16. But your page doesn't seem to contain anything
>outside us-ascii, and so you could even use charset=us-ascii.
>utf-8 is upwards compatible to that, so you could also use utf-8.
>
>There is no single one-and-only character encoding on the Web.
>The most important things are that:
>- You choose one this is used widely (us-ascii, utf-8, iso-8859-1,...)
>- You make sure that you know what you actually use
>- You make sure that you label your pages correctly.
>
>You will have to make very similar decisions for XHTML, so there
>is no waste of time if you think about it now.
>
>Regards,  Martin.
>
>At 23:25 01/08/08 -0400, $B%!(Bee$B+I(Bing$B%1%&(B wrote:
>>Hello, I am currently trying to bring my site up to specs, and I have
>>the following meta tag on my page. Your validator does not seem to
>>support this charset, yet on your site you specify that THIS IS the most
>>current charset and is recommended. What I need to know is, am I doing
>>this correctly, because I copied this code from a reputable help
>>website, yet it seems to cause a validation error (Shouldn't it all be
>>in lower case?). Is ISO-10646 the current recommended charset for
>>HTML4.01 documents written in American English?
>>
>><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ISO-10646">
>>
>>I believe for now, I will remove the charset tag completely.....since I
>>do not know which charset to use! Advice would be greatly appreciated!
>>Here is my URL: http://www.seething13.com
>>It is very hard to find easy to understand info on this topic, and I am
>>dead set on writing a tutorial for other to refer to once I figure it
>>all out! This is very frustrating! OH, and what's this about XHTML 1.0?
>>Should I even BOTHER trying to conform to HTML 4.01 if XHTML 1.0 is
>>going to replace it soon? I'm sorry to ask so much but I HAVE been
>>surfing your site for 3 days now and still have not found the answers I
>>am looking for.
>>
>>Many thanks,
>>
>>Seething
>

Received on Friday, 10 August 2001 02:46:33 UTC