On 4/4/06, David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > It would be interesting to know if anyone who was using US-ASCII
> > output had to switch to a broader encoding because of some issue....
>
> I also tend do use US-ASCII for anything that might go near a web server
> although I make sure to use omit-xml-encoding in that case as well so
> that the files are well formed as UTF-8 documents and parsable by all
> XML systems. An XML system may (and if i recall correctly, some older
> ones, eg IE6 if running under windows 2000 in some configurations, did)
> issue a fatal "unknown encoding" error if presented with a file saying
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
> even though the same file would parse correctly if this line were
> removed.

It's worth pointing out that in XSLT 1.0 specifying anything other
than UTF-8 or UTF-16 will override omit-xml-declaration="yes" and
output the xml declaration even if the encoding is a subset of one of
the defaults, and therefore still perfectly legal  (I'm surprised you
didn't mention it as you were the one who proprosed the change weren't
you?)