Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Januar 2014 um 21:12 Uhr
Von: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl>
An: "Buck Golemon" <buck@yelp.com>
Cc: "Markus Scherer" <markus.icu@gmail.com>, "Jörg Knappen" <jknappen@web.de>, "Frédéric Grosshans" <frederic.grosshans@gmail.com>, unicode <unicode@unicode.org>, unicode@norbertlindenberg.com
Betreff: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Do you know a tool to decode "UTF-8 twice"
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Buck Golemon <buck@yelp.com> wrote:
> Anne: Given that the intent is to implement exactly the whatwg spec, and the
> group is currently called "whatwg" (even though it may eventually become a
> historical artifact), is "whatwg-1252" most appropriate?
It's up to you I suppose, but "whatwg-1252" just seems like long term
it will lose its meaning. For the web "windows-1252" will always have
this meaning due to deployed content, so "web-windows-1252" if you
need to disambiguate from a different implementation of windows-1252
makes sense to me.
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/