>There is no ideal solution, and your "purist" solutions have practical >problems. You can't force "correct" solutions on people when they have >practical problems--it won't work, they won't do it, the solution fails >and you're probably in a worse spot than you were to begin with.
That's sometimes true. On the other hand, if you accept workarounds, you may end up supporting them from now til forever. Whereas if you refuse to implement workarounds, and force people to fix their systems, sometimes it will be easier to just fix the systems, and you see the buggy behavior disappear. Bad HTML that browsers bork on gets fixed. Bad HTML that browsers accept doesn't. Apache implemented the HTTP (2?) spec in a way that AOL didn't work with. Apache, being right, didn't back down, and AOL fixed their servers and browsers. GCC and Linux developers regularly have spats about illegal C in the kernel. The Linux developers regularly fix such C so the kernel compiles with later compilers. In this case, the OGG spec may not make much difference (who uses Yen signs and Backslashes in MP3 tags?). But given the choice between complex behavior and simpler, more correct behavior that won't matter much in the end, I'd go with the simple correct behavior. Then it's going to be implemented more consistently, and you never have to try and deprecate it once it's a moot point. -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
