[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- To: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 03:05:26 +0200
John Cowan wrote:
>
> Chris Lilley wrote:
> > Redundancy can be good; a
> > charset parameter and an XML encoding declaration that say the same
> > thing and work the same way, which is what I was suggesting, is good.
>
> Yes, indeed. Nevertheless, the charset parameter has one
> advantage over the encoding declaration: it is guaranteed by MIME
> to be in ASCII, and thus always readable.
Okay, true
> A document with a
> Content-Type of "text/xml;charset=cp-ebcdic-us" can be affirmatively
> rejected by a client that does not understand EBCDIC, whereas a
> client which has only the encoding declaration may *suppose* that
> the document is EBCDIC, based on the Appendix F heuristics, but cannot
> *know*.
On the contrary; it can suppose that, but having made that supposition
it can check it. It can parse the document, using the cp-ebcidic-us
conversion from bytes to characters, and having done so it can look in
the XML declaration for an encoding declaration, and one of two things
happen:
1) right there, it says encoding="cp-ebcidic-us"
2) it doesn't, so it halts with a fatal error.
Please note that I am describing normative behaviour, not non-normativce
behaviour.
--
Chris
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
