On 12/5/11 9:55 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
If that is all they tested, then I'd said they did not test enough.
That's normal for the web.
(For the record, reading a particular page in a language is a much
simpler task than reading the language; I can't "read German", but I can
certainly read a German subway map.)
Or Polish subway map - which doesn't default to said encoding.
Indeed. I don't think anyone thinks the existing situation is all fine
or anything.
I said I agreed with him that Faruk's solution was not good. However, I
would not be against treating<DOCTYPE html> as a 'default to UTF-8'
declaration
This might work, if there hasn't been too much cargo-culting yet. Data
urgently needed!
Not unless we change the authoring tools. Half the time these things
are just directly exported from a word processor.
Please educate me. I'm perhaps 'handicapped' in that regard: I haven't
used MS Word on a regular basis since MS Word 5.1 for Mac. Also, if
"export" means "copy and paste"
It can mean that, or "save as HTML" followed by copy and paste.
then on the Mac, everything gets
converted via the clipboard
On Mac, the default OS encoding is UTF-8 last I checked. That's
decidedly not the case on Windows.
OK: Quotation marks. However, in 'old web pages', then you also find
much more use of HTML entities (such as“) than you find today.
We should take advantage of that, no?
I have no idea what you're trying to say,
Sorry. What I meant was that character entities are encoding
independent.
Yes.
And that lots of people - and authoring tools - have
inserted non-ASCII letters and characters as character entities,
Sure. And lots have inserted them "directly".
At any rate: A page which uses
character entities for non-ascii would render the same regardless of
encoding, hence a switch to UTF-8 would not matter for those.
Sure. We're not worried about such pages here.
-Boris
