[whatwg] US-ASCII vs. ASCII in Web Socket Protocol

WeBMartians webmartians at verizon.net
Fri Dec 4 04:52:12 PST 2009

Hmmm... Maybe it would be better to say ISO-646US rather than ASCII. 
There is a lot of impreciseness about the very low value characters 
(less than 0x20 space) in the ASCII "specifications." The same can be 
said about the higher end.
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Yuzo Fujishima wrote:
>> I see both "US-ASCII" and "ASCII" are used in: 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol-54
>> If they mean the same thing, one should be used consistently.
>> In the document, US-ASCII seems to mean encoding while ASCII mean 
>> charset. Is this common? (I guess US-ASCII is commonly considered as an 
>> alias for ASCII. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#Aliases )
> I've changed the spec to use "ASCII" consistently.
> Cheers,

More information about the whatwg mailing list