Subject: Re: [xsl] Unicode usage From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:13:11 -0500 |
[Julian Reschke] > > No, I'm saying that the encoding is completely irrelevant, as long the > encoding declaration and the *actual* encoding match. Wrong declarations are > the problem, because if the declaration doesn't match the encoding, the user > agent will do the wrong thing for non-ASCII characters (ignoring EBCDIC for > a moment :-). > Yes, there have been a lot of utf-8 or default encoding declarations when the encoding was iso-8859-x, to call out a common case. I was under the impression that, at least on Win95/98, that you could still have the wrong high-order characters displayed even with correct encoding declarations. But maybe I'm wrong here... [me] > > That would seem logical, but I don't think it always happens. I think it > > depends on the version of Windows you have and which application you use. > > Just think of all those posts to this list where an accented character > > displayed as something else. We usually tell them that the character is > Cheers, Tom P XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Unicode usage, Julian Reschke | Thread | RE: [xsl] Unicode usage, Julian Reschke |
[xsl] line feed problem, Gene LaCava | Date | RE: [xsl] Unicode usage, Julian Reschke |
Month |