On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Renat Zubairov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 to UTF > > IMHO it's advantage that T5 will take care about it. > Concerning the one/two bytes penalties one can always use gzipped output :)
Something that Tapestry 5.1 should just take care of automatically. > > 2008/7/30 Josh Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> +1 me too >> >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Ulrich Stärk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> From me too. >>> >>> Uli >>> >>> Filip S. Adamsen schrieb: >>> >>> +1 on this one. >>>> >>>> -Filip >>>> >>>> On 2008-07-29 16:39, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: >>>> >>>>> Well, it's not like we're pushing a bytestream from the web browser to >>>>> the database, or vice-versa. Everything is being read into memory as >>>>> UTF, whether it starts as UTF-8 in the browser, or ISO-8859-1 in the >>>>> database. As its read from one source or written to another, the >>>>> character set is going to change. >>>>> >>>>> My observation is that the current design; allowing every page to have >>>>> its own charset, is beginning to feel like overkill, especially given >>>>> that the solution has a number of frayed edges. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Massimo Lusetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Here's a question. I'm still struggling with getting Tapestry to do >>>>>>> the right encoding when producing output, and to set the response >>>>>>> encoding to the correct value before reading query parameters. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's lots of edge cases, related to Ajax, to form uploads, and to >>>>>>> complex components, such as BeanEditForm, where content may be >>>>>>> gathered from multiple pages. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What if there was just a single default application character set, >>>>>>> which would default to UTF-8? This is pretty much what people are >>>>>>> doing with the UTF-8 RequestHandler filter. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This would simplify a bunch of stuff, since output encoding would >>>>>>> always be the same, as would request encoding. We could get rid of >>>>>>> the some of the meta-data as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is UTF-8 sufficiently well supported by browsers? Is this an option >>>>>>> that works for Big5 Chinese and other non-Western language locales? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Howard, how this would fit with existing DB and/or other data sources >>>>>> (files for example) already encoded as ISO-8859-1 ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Massimo >>>>>> http://meridio.blogspot.com >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Joshua Long >> Sun Certified Java Programmer >> http://www.joshlong.com/ >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Renat Zubairov > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
