- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 05:20:01 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15195
Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|WONTFIX |
--- Comment #4 from Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> 2012-01-29 05:19:59 UTC ---
> Rationale: The "systems" in [3] effectively means character encodings. When
> using an explicit UTF-16LE, you're not allowed to use a BOM, so a leading BOM
> isn't a BOM, it's part of the text stream. We strip it anyway.
Are you saying that because HTML5 8.2.2.1 step (2) allows and may make use of a
transport specified encoding, and because that encoding may be UTF-16LE, that
this makes HTML5 a system "using an explicit UTF-16LE"?
And that, consequently, the language (in [3])
"Where the byte order is explicitly specified, such as in UTF-16BE or UTF-16LE,
then all U+FEFF characters — even at the very beginning of the text — are to be
interpreted as zero width no-break spaces."
is violated in the case that HTML5 8.2.2.3 requires an initial U+FEFF to be
ignored (as if it were a BOM rather than a ZWNBSP)?
If this is the case, then I believe my comment can be positively resolved by
merely adding the following sentence to the end of the Note in question:
<quote>
See [UNICODE] Section 16.8, which specifies that an initial U+FEFF be
interpreted as zero width no-break space "where the byte order is explicitly
specified".
</quote>
--
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 29 January 2012 05:20:04 UTC