"Martin J. Duerst" wrote:
At 00:21 00/03/15 +0900, MURATA Makoto wrote:
>> - XML sent as application/xml (or equivalent):
>> - Charset parameter is strongly recommended, and if present,
>> it takes precedence.
>
>Charset parameter is *disallowed*.
I'm not sure it makes sense to disallow it, but discouraging
it might be fine.
No. Discourage means wool; it means sometimes-this, sometimes-that. It
means admitting the possibility of conflicting sources of information.
You might think that we can avoid bad WWW servers by this change. But
we cannnot. We have to handle a collection of XML, XSL, CSS, VBScript,
JavaScript, etc. We need a solution that works for every format.
Otherwise, data will corrupt.
CSS is served as text/css. XSL is XML. VBScript and JavaScript may be
served as application/... If they don't have a 'charset' parameter,
and they don't have any internal way to indicate the encoding,
that's the problem of these registrations, not our problem.
Yes. Thanks for the reminder about the scope and purpose of this list.
And more to the point, data will not corrupt if it is left alone. However,
software which blindly fiddles with data it does not understand is fairly
obviously a source of corruption.
--
Chris