From: Michael P. <mp...@pl...> - 2008-02-22 21:30:46
|
Noam Weinstein wrote: >> I wouldn't think so. Once a site is using UTF8 will they really be going >> to something else? > > I guess if UTF-8 is the final, stable goal, then we should be OK! (This > raises a bigger question that I've discussed with Jesse & Dave - are we > really aiming to support multiple character sets, or just to get everyone > using UTF-8? And - especially if non-UTF8 installations confuse Ajax/JS - > should the UTF-8 Charset ultimately be a requirement and not an optional > directive?) That's a good question. I don't think that there's a way to do AJAX with multiple character sets. I'll be happy to be proven wrong :) So if we want to allow multiple character sets then I think we need to have a way to turn off Krang's Ajaxiness. If we do this via a config directive then we should also put in a check to make sure that they aren't trying to use Ajax with a non-UTF-8 charset. >> Also, if the code is really using non-ascii as keys, then >> changing the underlying hash's keys would break that code right? > > That's a good point - I mean, it's not impossible that the keys would be > built dynamically, but I see your point that it's just as likely to break > things as fix them... So I'll leave it alone and we'll hope nobody's doing > anything too crazy with their add-ons! Agreed. -- Michael Peters Plus Three, LP |