multiple encoding specs (Re: IE5.0 does not conform to RFC2376)

[Chris Lilley]

John Cowan wrote:

> > But it does not have to be explicit. It can be implied.  good way of
> > formalising that implication would be to refer to the rules in the XML
> > 1.0 Recommendation.
> 
> I meant that if you are processing a MIME document, as long as you
> know its major type is "text", you can always determine the charset.
> There is either an explicit charset parameter, or the implicit
> charset of either "US-ASCII" or "ISO-8859-1" depending on the
> underlying transport protocol.

Aha. So, if you know that what the HTTP server sent is text/xml, then no
charset parameter means it is US-ASCII, but if you think it is just
text/*, then that means it is ISO-8859-1 ?

And if you save it to disk and then read it back, no encoding
declaration means it is either UTF-8 or UTF-16.

--
Chris

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)