Re: revised "generic syntax" internet draft

Keld J|rn Simonsen <> Tue, 22 April 1997 20:09 UTC

Received: from cnri by id aa11573; 22 Apr 97 16:09 EDT
Received: from services.Bunyip.Com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19522; 22 Apr 97 16:09 EDT
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA12298 for uri-out; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 15:43:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (mocha.Bunyip.Com []) by (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA12286 for <>; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 15:42:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from by with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA06829 (mail destined for; Tue, 22 Apr 97 15:42:55 -0400
Received: (from keld@localhost) by (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA22167; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 21:42:34 +0200
Message-Id: <>
From: Keld J|rn Simonsen <>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 21:42:33 +0200
In-Reply-To: "Martin J. Duerst" <> "Re: revised "generic syntax" internet draft" (Apr 22, 18:02)
X-Charset: ISO-8859-1
X-Char-Esc: 29
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Mnemonic-Intro: 29
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.2 4/12/91)
To: "Martin J. Duerst" <>
Subject: Re: revised "generic syntax" internet draft
Cc: John C Klensin <>, Dan Oscarsson <>,,,
Precedence: bulk

In response to Martin on using labels:

Thinking about it, I see that a client needs to have the information
about conversion from the charset of the encoded HTML document
to display the document, so the conversion intelligense must already
be with the browser. So there is no need to also require the
server to have conversion software. Thus I agree that only
having one charset (I prefer UTF-8) for the URL is advisable,
and that labelling with a charset should not be done.