> > I'd suggest that you dont do this... Adding support for > > ISO-8859-1 directly into H::T will set a precedent for other > > encodings (not everyone uses the Latin character set)... > > Unfortunately, the precedent is that H::T generates broken, > non-compliant HTML. The spec says that anything that's not > 7 bit ASCII needs to be encoded. Latin1 is the common > denominator.
Which spec says that anything other than 7bit ascii needs to be encoded? I'm not sure that I understand which spec you are refereing to. I understand that at minimum the a HTML document should specify the document encoding (or at least a META tag with the HEAD of the document). If no encoding is specified, then the browser can assume that it is encoded in ISO-8859-1. > > Why not just output the text as UTF8? > > The infrastructure we're building on supports Latin1, but > not UTF-8. Fixing H::T to generate compliant bits is simple; > reworking 20 person years of code to do UTF-8 isn't. > Nothing in the patch precludes using other encodings. Thats true, but if we add support for encoding to Latin, should we then do that for every other encoding? regards, Mathew ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id065&op=click _______________________________________________ Html-template-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/html-template-users
