On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Charles Overbeck <coverbec_at_pacbell.net> wrote:
> Hi Tatu,
>
> Thanks, that helps ease a lot of my concerns.
>
> Although I did find this link,
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/07/21/dive.html, which talks about RFC 3023,
> which states that if the HTTP content-type is text/xml, and and there is no
> charset specified in the HTTP header, then the character encoding is assumed
> to be... us-ascii! Even if the the XML has the encoding attribute explicitly
Whoa. Thank you for reference -- I had not seen this one. I don't know
if it is used in practice, and it definitely seems conflicting with
other specifications. I'll see if I can google up anything related to
this RFC.
About the only thing that I knew to default to Ascii is the subset
allowed for xml declaration; which is chosen so that xml parser can
reliably parse up until encoding declaration only using Ascii (with
exception of EBCDIC variants which need alternate handling).
So yes it seems sensible to use application/xml then just to play it safe.
-+ Tatu +-