W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: I18N issues with the XML Specification

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 17:08:06 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.32.20000410170117.014d27d0@pop.intergate.ca>
To: mark.davis@us.ibm.com, John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Cc: MURATA Makoto <muraw3c@attglobal.net>, Rick Jelliffe <ricko@gate.sinica.edu.tw>, xml-editor@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org 
At 05:24 PM 4/10/00 -0600, mark.davis@us.ibm.com wrote:
>There are some guidelines in http://www.unicode.org/unicode/faq/#BOM

from which I quote:

 3.Where the precise type of the data stream is known (e.g. Unicode 
   big-endian or Unicode little-endian), the BOM should not be used. 

I think that this assertion is highly questionable in the general case,
and completely false in the context of XML. -Tim
Received on Monday, 10 April 2000 20:12:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:30 GMT