W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: byte order mark article

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 19:51:14 +0100
To: www-international@w3.org
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Message-ID: <20121122195114105414.5b9cf6ea@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Leif Halvard Silli, Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:33:57 +0100:

> (II.)  Positivity! The page tells much about disadvantages of the BOM. 
> Could you please also describe some advantages to including the BOM? 
> Speaking about the UTF-8 BOM, then those advantages are 
> 
> 	a) It is an UTF-8 _signature_ - thus it prevents the page from
>        defaulting to to - well - the default encoding,
> 	b) It has effect in both XML/XHTML and HTML.
> 	c) It is small/short,
> 	d) It is very safe: Per Anne's Encoding spec - as well as implemented 
> in IE (I have not tested released IE10), 

But now I have tested (via the before mentioned neterenderer.de), and 
it seems like the IE10 team for some reason went away from the 
behaviour of IE6,IE7,IE8 and IE9. Meaning that the BOM currently does 
not win over HTTP, in IE10.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2012 18:51:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 November 2012 18:51:45 GMT