[whatwg] A comment to character encoding declaration

[Ian Hickson]

On Thu, 22 May 2008, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On May 22, 2008, at 12:23, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > 
> >   EUC-KR -> Windows-949
> >   KS_C_5601-1987 -> Windows-949
> 
> FWIW, x-windows-949 would be more correct given the current IANA situation.

Should I just changed the spec to strip leading "x-"s? That would deal 
with our Big5 problem too, as well as:

> The list is missing [...] x-iso-8859-11


> After pondering the usefulness of conformance errors in this area, I'm 
> inclined to think that there should be no particular errors when in 
> coding name aliasing happens. This means that I would even suggest 
> removing the C1 range bytes as errors when ISO-8859-1 turns into 
> Windows-1252. My rationale is that the cost/benefit characteristics of 
> reporting theoretical wrongness in this area are unfavorable.

See earlier mail today on this topic.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'