* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| It doesn't make much sense to have the meta statement there, as I
| would expect most browser to assume ASCII compatibility, but I agree
| that must only be used sounds too harsh.
|
| [...]
|
| it struck us: if we can see that the page claims to be UTF-16, it
| can't
Following is result of Mac OS X and OmniWeb browser on
http://jshin.net/i18n/utftest
5 cases of proper display:
+Y, BE, 16, UTF-16 and UTF-16BE
+Y, LE, 16, UTF-16
+N, BE, 16, UTF-16 and UTF-16BE
All the rest showed only the ascii correctly.
At 01:42 +0100 2002-04-25, Michael Everson wrote:
On http://jshin.net/i18n/utftest/bom_utf16be.utf16.html under OS X
you don't see just question marks, though -- you see the Last Resort
font showing that Korean characters not present in the font are in
the text. Awesome.
In OmniWeb at least.
| I am surprised by the must only be used. It seems I am not
| conforming by including a meta statement in the utf-16 HTML page. I
| should either remove the statement or encode the HTML up to and
| including that statement as ascii. I'll check on this.
It doesn't make much sense to have
At 22:25 02/04/19 +0100, Steffen Kamp wrote:
However, when giving the validator a ASCII-only document with a META tag
specifying UTF-16 as encoding (just for testing) it says that it does not
yet support this encoding, so I don't fully trust the validator in this case.
The validator indeed
Just a very small correction:
At 07:19 02/04/22 -0400, James H. Cloos Jr. wrote:
There are other ways as well. Apache will already (if you use the
default configs) add the Content-Language header if you use a filename
like foo.en.html. You could have it also add the charset via a
similar
Jungshik Shin,
Hi! Just a couple of minor comments.
Opera 6 lists UTF-16 as an encoding. Netscape 6.2 lists UTF-16LE. IE 6
does not list any UTF other than UTF-8. I haven't noticed any encodings
becoming available or unavailable when I access pages with different
encodings, but maybe there is a
* Tex Texin
|
| In looking at the HTML 4.01 spec to quote the above, I noted an
| interesting sentence:
| The META declaration must only be used when the character encoding
| is organized such that ASCII-valued bytes stand for ASCII characters
| (at least until the META element is parsed).
|
|
Tex == Tex Texin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tex I am surprised by the must only be used. It seems I am not
Tex conforming by including a meta statement in the utf-16 HTML
Tex page. I should either remove the statement or encode the HTML up
Tex to and including that statement as ascii. I'll check
--- Tex Texin [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev: Jungshik
Shin,
Opera 6 lists UTF-16 as an encoding. Netscape 6.2
lists UTF-16LE. IE 6
does not list any UTF other than UTF-8. I haven't
noticed any encodings
becoming available or unavailable when I access
pages with different
encodings, but maybe
Jim, thanks for all the info.
I would prefer to not clutter filenames with encodings and locales, and
the remainder I need to coordinate with my ISP. I'll talk to them and
see what they let me do.
tex
James H. Cloos Jr. wrote:
Tex == Tex Texin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tex I am surprised
Thanks Stefan, that's good to know.
Seems a bit odd to hide the encoding abilities, especially when there is
already a more menu pick...
thanks for the info.
tex
Stefan Persson wrote:
IE 5 supports more encodings than listed. For example,
the western European DOS encoding is supported
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Tom Gewecke wrote:
With BOM at the beginning, Netscape 4.x, Netscape 6.x/Mozilla and MS
IE 5.x/6.x can handle them without much problem except that support
for characters above BMP varies from browser to browser as Tex tried to
demonstrate in his test pages.
The
James H. Cloos Jr. wrote:
Since you are using apache, it is quite easy to get the extra headers
sent at the protocol level rather than having to use meta tags.
You can use a Header directive in an .htaccess file a la:
Files foobar.html
Header set Content-Language en-US
On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 12:19:15PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My test pages don't have yet characters beyond BMP(I just
recycled a page I made a long time ago for Korean testing) . I may later
add them. (Tex, can I use your sample page? I'd rather put up a page
with some content
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Tom Gewecke wrote:
I have added a couple more variations of the Unicode supplementary
characters example page, for utf-16 and utf-32.
I had the impression that it was not really practical to use web pages with
these encodings over the internet, because they do not
I have added a couple more variations of the Unicode supplementary
characters example page, for utf-16 and utf-32.
I am not sure if your UTF-16 and UTF-32 test pages really conform to the
HTML standard. The server states a content type of text/html without
charset information. From the content
I have added a couple more variations of the Unicode supplementary
characters example page, for utf-16 and utf-32.
I thought that because support for utf-8 supplementary characters was
weak, that utf-16 would be weaker.
So I was surprised that Netscape 4.7 displays the UTF-16 page.
I didn't
18 matches
Mail list logo
