+1 to UTF
IMHO it's advantage that T5 will take care about it.
Concerning the one/two bytes penalties one can always use gzipped output :)
2008/7/30 Josh Long [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
+1 me too
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Ulrich Stärk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From me too.
Uli
Filip S.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Renat Zubairov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 to UTF
IMHO it's advantage that T5 will take care about it.
Concerning the one/two bytes penalties one can always use gzipped output :)
Something that Tapestry 5.1 should just take care of automatically.
2008/7/30
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a question. I'm still struggling with getting Tapestry to do
the right encoding when producing output, and to set the response
encoding to the correct value before reading query parameters.
There's lots of
Well, it's not like we're pushing a bytestream from the web browser to
the database, or vice-versa. Everything is being read into memory as
UTF, whether it starts as UTF-8 in the browser, or ISO-8859-1 in the
database. As its read from one source or written to another, the
character set is going
Em Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:39:21 -0300, Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escreveu:
My observation is that the current design; allowing every page to have
its own charset, is beginning to feel like overkill, especially given
that the solution has a number of frayed edges.
What about setting a
I agree with using UTF-8 as default... We're using the UTF-8 Filter
for a while with some different db's (PostgreSql and SqlServer,
encoded with ISO-8859-1) and we never had any problem with it.
+1
--
Atenciosamente,
Marcelo Lotif
Programador Java e Tapestry
FIEC - Federação das Indústrias do
Strings are stored in UTF-16 by default anyway in Java (a Char type is
16bits), so unless you're constructing the strings in very creative
ways, you're already paying the memory cost. The question of what you
output to the browser or the database is a matter for adaptation and
PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 July 2008 02:59
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: What if Tapestry's I18N was just UTF-8?
Em Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:17:11 -0300, Howard Lewis Ship
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
escreveu:
What if there was just a single default application character set,
which would default to UTF-8
UTF-8 as default
+1
Em Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:44:03 -0300, Blower, Andy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
Thiago,
Hi!
Sorry I don't understand your objection. Could you expand on it please?
Especially where you say have a memory and bandwidth penalty using 2
bytes to encode many characters that would be encoded as
+1 on this one.
-Filip
On 2008-07-29 16:39, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Well, it's not like we're pushing a bytestream from the web browser to
the database, or vice-versa. Everything is being read into memory as
UTF, whether it starts as UTF-8 in the browser, or ISO-8859-1 in the
database. As
I'm already coding it up, but I created a pre-change tag just in case
it turns out to be a problem. I think this is the right approach.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Filip S. Adamsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 on this one.
-Filip
On 2008-07-29 16:39, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Well,
From me too.
Uli
Filip S. Adamsen schrieb:
+1 on this one.
-Filip
On 2008-07-29 16:39, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Well, it's not like we're pushing a bytestream from the web browser to
the database, or vice-versa. Everything is being read into memory as
UTF, whether it starts as UTF-8 in the
+1 me too
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Ulrich Stärk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From me too.
Uli
Filip S. Adamsen schrieb:
+1 on this one.
-Filip
On 2008-07-29 16:39, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Well, it's not like we're pushing a bytestream from the web browser to
the database, or
Em Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:17:11 -0300, Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escreveu:
What if there was just a single default application character set,
which would default to UTF-8?
This is not a nice option. Web applications that need accented characters
(most Latin languages), but don't
15 matches
Mail list logo
