- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:19:20 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, <www-svg@w3.org>
On Thursday, November 25, 2004, 1:30:07 PM, Anne wrote: AvK> Chris Lilley wrote: >> AvK> Because it has a BOM before the start of the document >> >> You mean, it has one and is thus UTF-16 (what the spec says) or , it has >> one and is still UTF-8 (what you said)? AvK> I never said that. Anyway, it's UTF-16. >> AvK> where your example does not? Quite obvious IMHO. >> >> Of course mine does, as I said, the following content, encoded in UTF 16 >> thus it has one. AvK> That's not true. You can have UTF-16 or UTF-8 content for that matter AvK> without a BOM. Um, leaving aside UTF-8, and noting that UTF-16 is not the same as UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE, please justify this statement with reference toa named portion of a specification. Isn't this straying rather far away from the registration of the SVG media type? Your original assertion that in the absence of a charset parameter all +xml content defaults to UTF-8 having been proven false, I am not really sure where this particular sub-thread is leading. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2004 13:19:21 UTC