- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:31:04 +0200
- To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
* Martin Duerst wrote: >It looks like the document isn't correct. >The document contains two-byte sequences where the second >byte is in the 20-7E range. This isn't GB2312 as defined >above. I don't know what it is. What about GBK (aka windows-936)? Windows maps GB2312, iso-ir-58 and GBK to the same code page (936), uses thus the same decoder and gives them the canonical name "Chinese simplified (GB2312)". This would probably explain why http://www.fineart.com.tw/cn/news/news.asp http://www.cadstudy.net/ http://www.solar-energy.com.tw/index-gb.htm http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2002Jan/0079.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2002May/0306.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/smil-editors/2002JulSep/0846.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2002Jun/0564.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2002Jun/0585.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2002May/0329.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-validator/2002Mar/1120.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2002Apr/0552.html ... and an many other documents marked as GB2312 are invalid GB2312.
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2003 15:31:17 UTC