[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] URI encoding.
I think it makes sense to reference this appendix for URL rewriting. Do we also stipulate that all markup must be UTF-8 encoded. I thought there were some reservations on this tactic. I don't think there are any other ways to assemble multiple charsets into a single page. The idea is that each entity may be written using a different charset. If this is allowed then the container will have to convert it into UTF-8 before sending to the client (browser). The other solution would be to have the container indicate to the entity which encoding mechanism should be used. This would ensure a single encoding type across aggregated portlets. Would simply requiring that portlet entities generate UTF-8 be too limiting? If so, do we have use cases where this is the case? Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Freedman" <Michael.Freedman@oracle.com> To: "WSRP-Markup" <wsrp-markup@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:53 PM Subject: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] URI encoding. > Please read the following W3C recommendation: > http://www.w3.org/TR/html40/appendix/notes.html#non-ascii-chars > > It distinguishes between the encoding of URIs from the markup in which > these URIs exist. It recommends that URIs are first encoded using UTF8 > then URI escaped prior to document encoding. > > Should we just reference this recommendation? > -Mike- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC