On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull < turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> In what context? WHAT-WG's encoding standard is *all about browsers*. > If a codec is feeding text into a process that renders them all as > glyphs for a human to look at, that's one thing. The codec doesn't > want to fatal there, and the likely fallback glyph is something from > the control glyphs block if even windows-125x doesn't have a glyph > there. I guess it sort of makes sense. > sure it does -- and python is not a browser, and python itself has nothigni visual -- but we sure want to be abel to write code that produces visual representations of maybe messy text... if you're feeding a program ... > the codec has no idea when or how that's > going to get interpreted. sure -- which is why others have suggested that if WATWG is supported, then it *should* only be used for encoding, not encoding. But we are supposed to be consenting adults here -- I see no reason to prevent encoding -- maybe it would be useful for testing??? (as with JSON data, which I believe is > "supposed" to be UTF-8, but many developers use the legacy charsets > they're used to and which are often embedded in the underlying > databases etc, ditto XML), OK -- if developers do the wrong thing, then they do the wrong thing -- we can't prevent that! And Python's lovely "text is unicode" model actually makes that hard to do wong. But we do need a way to decode messy text, and then send it off to JSON or whatever properly encoded. -CHB -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
