[whatwg] Web Encodings
Anne van Kesteren
annevk at opera.com
Sun Aug 30 07:01:33 PDT 2009
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 03:47:34 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> I've backed off UTS22. I think we need the IANA list updated, though, to
> include the aliases browsers support. I understand you are working on
> this? I would like to remove the table in the HTML5 spec that defines
> such mappings, once that is done.
Part of the alias table is apparently incorrect. I will be working on
registering the required aliases though, yes, once some more research is
complete. This will however not solve at least the following two problems:
* Some encodings need to be decoded (and encoded) using another encoding.
(The other table HTML5 contains.)
* The standards for encodings do not always match the required
implementation of the encoding. Apparently just like with anything else
encoding standards do not match reality.
(Initially it also seemed to be a problem to register encodings with an
"x-" prefix, but I think we're past that now, though of course we can't be
sure until it actually succeeds.)
>> Another problem HTML5 does not solve is giving a definitive list of
>> encodings clients have to implement to be compatible with a large body
>> of Web content. This means new clients will have to reverse engineer
>> that list from existing clients which I think is bad.
> If you can get browser vendors to agree on a comprehensive and accurate
> list, I'm happy to add it to the spec. But unless a plurality of browser
> vendors actually decide to standardise on a single set of encodings, I
> don't know that it makes sense to spec something here.
Once we've documented more details on
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Web_Encodings we should be able to make some
basic requirements. Such as requiring the encodings everyone supports. I
suppose HTML5 might not be the best place for that though. It definitely
has all the right people involved, but encodings affect more than just
Anne van Kesteren
More information about the whatwg