olivier Thereaux wrote: > That code may be a mistake... I don't recall being around when > it was added, so it may be coming from a zealous interpretation > of RFC 3023... Hard to judge, "it annoyed me" doesn't count. But you wrote that the validator ignores the Latin-1 "default" in RFC 2616 for other text/* types. If that is okay the validator can also ignore the text/xml US-ASCII "default" in RFC 3023, simply for consistency. Ideally the validator could treat "default" as a default, using it only if there is no better indication within the document, but that is a separate design decision. FrankReceived on Thursday, 13 March 2008 08:11:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:59:06 UTC