Den 2012-11-21 19:30:50 skrev Doug Ewell <doug_at_ewellic.org>:
> My problem is with the double standard. In some people's minds, if IE
> does it, it's called "moronic" or "brain-dead."
If the software with the biggest market share does it, then everyone else
will have to follow it, no matter what you call it, unfortunately...
No-one would be more happy than me if we could just ditch all the legacy
encodings and all switch to Unicode everywhere, but that will never
happen. There is enough legacy content out there that will never be
converted.
> This is the first time I've heard anyone say the problem didn't
> originate with IE.
Looking back at IE's version history, I see that version 1 was released in
August 1995, which was around the time I started creating my first web
pages (as a first-year student at the university), but I do recall having
issues with the Windows version of Netscape showing the 1252 extended
characters and the Solaris version not (and I preferred using the Solaris
lab). It might be that IE1 actually did this before Netscape, but I do
think Netscape was first (my first encounter with Netscape was in the
spring of 1995, but I was mostly concerned with character encodings in
Fidonet at that time).
Unfortunately, I cannot find a copy of Netscape 1.0 to test this on.
-- \\// Peter Krefting - Core Technology DeveloperReceived on Thu Nov 22 2012 - 01:57:47 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Nov 22 2012 - 01:57:49 CST