Re: Remapping charsets

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Jeffrey Mogul: "Confusion about Age: accuracy vs. safety"
• Previous message: Martin Hamilton: "chopping list"
• In reply to: Mirsad Todorovac: "Remapping charsets"

Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
> 
> -	let's suppose that browser cannot accept document charset, then
> 	document should be translated into charset which is supported
> 	by browser, but lest likely to loose some characters
> 
> 	(Example: with CP-1250 and iso-8859-2 there are only some
> 		  swapped blocks of chars, says Dave, so then there should

Not only swapped blocks. In ISO 8859-2 positions from 129 to 159
are not used. CP1250 uses all 256 characters.

> 		  never be a loss in conversion, but we don't need to have
> 		  both, duplicate versions of documents -- one for UN*X
> 		  machines, and one for Wind*ws CEE [and still more for
> 		  other platforms ...]

This is an implementation question and does not belong here really.
However, I think it's good to point out these things from time to time
because some (most?) implementors don't know about it.

-- 
Life is a sexually transmitted disease.

dave@fly.cc.fer.hr
dave@zemris.fer.hr

• Next message: Jeffrey Mogul: "Confusion about Age: accuracy vs. safety"
• Previous message: Martin Hamilton: "chopping list"
• In reply to: Mirsad Todorovac: "Remapping charsets"