On Jan 13, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Karl Williamson <pub...@khwilliamson.com> wrote:
>> Nice. So should we then adopt the same pattern as the HTML 5 spec? > > I'm still leery of overruling an =encoding line, especially if we have no > provision for telling us to not overrule. But it means that it's fine to > s/latin1/cp1252 when there is no =encoding, as far as I'm concerned, and I > haven't heard any dissent from that here. If you like, I can prepare a patch > for that; the EBCDIC portion is a little tricky. Are you going to release a > version of this module without this change? Yes, planning that now. Also announcing deprecation of support for Perls < 5.6 in the following release. >> And I wonder if that W3 spec issue you pointed to the other day could use a >> comment to this effect. > > I don't understand you here. This is a W3 website document, and we can't > edit it. I Oh, sorry, I was misremembering this link as a bug report. http://www.w3.org/TR/newline Never mind. David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
