- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:53:33 +0100
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Cc: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
How about being consistent about writing byte order mark and not byte-order mark since the former is the official form? Leif Halvard Silli Richard Ishida, Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:16:25 +0000: > On 18/12/2012 22:57, Asmus Freytag wrote: >> The text says >> >> >> What is a byte-order mark? >> >> <http://www.w3.org/International/questions/new/qa-byte-order-mark-new.en.php#bomwhat> >> >> At the beginning of a page that uses a Unicode >> >> <http://www.w3.org/International/articles/definitions-characters/Overview#unicode> >> character encoding >> >> <http://www.w3.org/International/articles/definitions-characters/Overview#charsets> >> you may find some bytes that represent the Unicode code point U+FEFF >> ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE (ZWNBSP). This combination of bytes is >> known as a byte-order mark (BOM). >> >> The BOM, when correctly used, is invisible. >> >> For a while now, there's been a formal name alias defined for the Byte >> order mark, Actually two, if you count the abbreviation. (See: >> http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/NameAliases.txt) >> >> FEFF;BYTE ORDER MARK;alternate >> FEFF;BOM;abbreviation >> >> Section 4.8 of the Unicode Standard explains that these aliases are >> designed (like the original character names) to be used as identifiers >> (e.g. in specifications, regular expressions etc.). >> >> With the introduction of U+2060 WORD JOINER, there's no longer a need to >> ever use FEFF for its ZWNSP effect, so from that point on, and with the >> availability of a formal alias, the name ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE just >> represents baggage. >> >> I recommend that the original name, if mentioned, be relegated to the >> status of a historical footnote. > > Sounds good to me. > > RI > > >> >> A./ >
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 11:54:01 UTC