[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: MURATA Makoto <murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 16:10:35 +0900
Chris Lilley wrote:
>
> MURATA Makoto wrote:
> > I strongly agree. This is the best approach. I sincerely hope that such
> > an attempt will happen at W3C.
>
> I have spoken to the Jigsaw team about this, explained the urgency, and
> hope to see an implementation in a forthcoming Jigsaw release. They said
> it was about an hours work or so.
That is great!
I think that further discussion in this mailing list about the justification
of the default for the charset parameter is not very useful. The discussion
should be moved to the ietf-xml-mime mailing list.
The current specification is a result of loooooong discussion. Nobody
is completely happy with it, but nobody is completely unhappy with it
(rememember that application/xml is also available). In their review
report of XML, the W3C I18N WG asked the XML CG not to change the precedence
rule of the charset parameter. If I create an I-D ignoring this request, I
would be ignoring the I18N WG as welll as strong oppositions from HTTP
people.
Since I intend to move the discussion to the IETF-xml-mime mailing list,
I merely state some facts here.
> By drawing this
> distinction, are you saying that RFC 2376 does not apply to HTTP and
> only applies to email?
RFC 2376 quite carefully mentions both HTTP and real MIME.
> Well, if a US-based group recommends US-ASCII that should not really be
> a surprise ;-) However, while US-ASCII is compatible with UTF-8 it is
> not the same; and it is not compatible with UTF-16. So, it is a very odd
> choice for a default.
IETF I18N guideline documents (RFC 2277 and RFC2130) recommend UTF-8 as the
default. When the WWW was invented, 8559-1 was the default. US-ASCII is
the intersection of the two.
Chris Lilley wrote:
>
> Yes, but I was not referring to Appendix F. I was referring to section
> 4.3.3 which is normative:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#charencoding
>
> Parsed entities which are stored in an encoding other than UTF-8
> or UTF-16 must begin with a text declaration containing an encoding
> declaration [...]
I agree that this is misleading. It only talks about the case that
MIME headers are not available (I will send out a request for clarification).
Chris Lilley wrote:
> > RFC2376 supercedes it, as intended by the XML WG.
>
> Supercedes Appendix F, or superceeds the whole of the XML
> Recommendation? I assume you mean the former.
Yes.
Makoto
Fuji Xerox Information Systems
Tel: +81-44-812-7230 Fax: +81-44-812-7231
E-mail: murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp
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)
|
