W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: XML Conformance Test

From: François Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:47:39 -0500
To: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@bigfoot.com>, <xml-editor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NCBBIGENIKFMMFDDBHFMOEBDALAB.yergeau@alis.com>
Your case "0xFF 0xFE 0x3C 0x00" matches the following case from the table in
Appendix F: "FF FE ## ## UTF-16, little-endian". As explained just above the
table, ## stands in for any byte, except that ## ## doesn't math "00 00"; it
does match "3C 00", however.

--
François Yergeau

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : xml-editor-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-editor-request@w3.org]De la
> part de Rob Lugt
> Envoyé : 8 novembre, 2000 18:10
> À : xml-editor@w3.org
> Objet : XML Conformance Test
>
>
> We have been using the Oasis XML conformance suite to test our
> Parser.  This
> has exposed a potential error in our implementation and we would like some
> clarification.
>
> The Oasis test file: xmltest/valid/sa/049.xml contains a Byte Order Mark,
> the first 4 octets are:- 0xFF 0xFE 0x3C 0x00
>
> The 2nd edition of the XML1.0 recommendation lists these possible
> Byte Order
> Marks:-
>
>       00 00 FE FF UCS-4, big-endian machine (1234 order)
>       FF FE 00 00 UCS-4, little-endian machine (4321 order)
>       00 00 FF FE UCS-4, unusual octet order (2143)
>       FE FF 00 00 UCS-4, unusual octet order (3412)
>       FE FF ## ## UTF-16, big-endian
>       FF FE ## ## UTF-16, little-endian
>       EF BB BF UTF-8
>
> None of these match the Byte Order Mark in 049.xml.  Can you tell
> us what is
> right, the test file or the XML 1.0 recomendation?
>
> Regards
> Rob Lugt
> ElCel Technology
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2000 17:48:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:31 GMT