- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:53:34 +0200
- To: whatwg@whatwg.org, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: commit-watchers@whatwg.org
whatwg@whatwg.org, Mon, 9 Aug 2010 18:16:12 -0700 (PDT): > Author: ianh > Date: 2010-08-09 18:16:10 -0700 (Mon, 09 Aug 2010) > New Revision: 5258 > <p>Authors are encouraged to use UTF-8. Conformance checkers may > - advise authors against using legacy encodings.</p> > + advise authors against using legacy encodings. <a > href=#refsRFC3629>[RFC3629]</a></p> Could we replace 'legacy encodings' with a clearer wording - or eventually define what 'legacy encodings' mean? The current wording could give the impression that any encoding other than UTF-8 is a legacy encoding. But it is unclear whether that is actually what is meant. Specifically, it is not clear from the above whether conformance checkers may advice authors against using UTF-16, since UTF-16 generally isn't associated with 'legacy encoding'. Another stumbling stone for someone who tries to make sense of the current wording, is that UTF-8 is ASCII-compatible and thereby more legacy than UTF-16 ... -- leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 10 August 2010 11:54:10 UTC