[whatwg] A comment to character encoding declaration
ian at hixie.ch
Thu May 22 15:44:59 PDT 2008
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. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg