Re: Encoding Standard (mostly complete)

[Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>]

Masatoshi Kimura replied to Shawn Steele:

>> Our implementation of encodings WILL NOT change.  Ever.
> Actually MS11-057 changed the IE decoder [1].

It looks like this was a bug fix to correct bad error handling of 
invalid data that could enable a cross-site scripting attack. Is this 
undesirable?

>> However, there are millions of our customers that depend on our
>> current behavior.  If that behavior changes even slightly, then
>> that will "corrupt" their data.
> Indeed, MS10-090 broke some ISO-2022-JP encoded Web pages [2]. Please
> make your action consitent with your words.

MS10-090 seems to be about auto-detection, not encoding behavior. 
Auto-detection becomes relevant when pages are not properly tagged.

>> Use Unicode.
> Even if we ignored non-Unicode encodings, we will need a documentation
> about UTF-16 anyway due to IE quirks (BOM overrides everything,
> default endian is little-endian contrary to the Unicode Standard,
> etc). Otherwise other browser implementors will have to (and did)
> reverse-engineer to develop a competing browser. Obviously TUS is
> useless about IE quirks.

Is that the goal here—to help browser implementers compete with 
Microsoft?

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell ­