• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:28:32 -0800
• In-reply-to: <400510BB.2010703@g...>
• References: <400510BB.2010703@g...> <40048CA2.2070609@g...> <r02000200-1028-D1176A3A460611D8AD220003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]> <5B1A714A-461A-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...> <200401140201.i0E21to01550@d...>

Julian Reschke wrote:
> Joe English wrote:
> > True, but the aggregator as a whole might still accept it --
> > possibly by noticing that the encoding is mislabelled and
> > munging the data into proper UTF-8 before passing it to the
> > parser.
>
> So how do you do it reliably.

I don't :-)  I just make sure that whatever comes *out* of
the fetch-from-the-web part of the pipeline is turned into
legal UTF-8 before passing it downstream to the next part of the
pipeline.  If characters get misinterpreted, so be it;
it's only a feed reader, not a critical application.



--Joe English

  jenglish@f...

• References:
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@g...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@g...>
  • Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by Date: Re: Noise-free Complex Systems
• Previous by thread: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by thread: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread