Jim:
I would disagree. I don't believe that all XHTML-Print enabled printers
will necessarily bite the bullet and include a complete XML parser that
requires support for UTF-16. I don't believe we should force that to
occur. Perhaps you should remind the group that XHTML-Print is target for
LOW-END printers with this embedded. No 3 gigahertz Pentium 4's with 512
MB of memory!!!
*******************************************
Don Wright don@lexmark.com
Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
Director, Alliances and Standards
Lexmark International
740 New Circle Rd C14/082-3
Lexington, Ky 40550
859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
*******************************************
"BIGELOW,JIM (HP-Boise,ex1)" <jim.bigelow@hp.com>@pwg.org on 09/02/2003
08:42:14 PM
Sent by: owner-xp@pwg.org
To: www-html-editor@w3.org
cc: xp@pwg.org
Subject: XP> Relaxing XHTML-Print's restriction to UTF-8 to include
UTF-16
> From: Henri Sivonen [mailto:hsivonen@iki.fi]
...
> It is said that if a "charset" parameter is present for the
> application/xhtml+xml MIME type, the only valid value is "utf-8". It
> would make sense to allow "utf-16" as well. All XML processors are
> required to support UTF-16 in addition to UTF-8, so allowing
> UTF-16 for XHTML-Print doesn't cause any additional burden
> to implementations. Also, the payload of
> Application/Vnd.pwg-multiplexed chunks is defined
> as octets, so UTF-16 strings can be delivered as
> Application/Vnd.pwg-multiplexed chunks without any further encoding.
>
I tend to agree with Henri when he says that support UTF-16 would not be
much more expensive than UTF-8. Does anyone on this list or the PWG's
XHTML-Print list disagree?
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 02 2003 - 21:07:00 EDT