- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:00:36 -0500
- To: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org
I see: "If the request response does specify a character encoding but it is not "UTF-8", FAIL" -- http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK/#id4485785 How about US-ASCII? especially since you can treat US-ASCII as UTF-8 and preserve the meaning of the bytes. It's perhaps not worthwhile to complicate things, if very few documents are labelled US-ASCII. p.s. I wonder if it's acceptable to limit encodings to UTF-8 and exclude UTF-16; it wasn't when XML was ratified. But I'll leave it to those who have 1st-hand experience with the need for UTF-16 to comment on that. p.p.s. The fragid #id4485785 seems fragile. If you're going to break it, break it only once, for the next draft. At that point, change it to something like #char-encoding-support and keep it that way for future revisions. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:00:55 UTC