- From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:33:53 +0900
- To: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, www-international@w3.org
Everybody on the w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org list: Please note that starting with this message, I'm cross-posting the www-international@w3.org list for i18n-related issues. This will make it easier to have a common discussion on the issues. Please also cross-post this list. At 00/07/10 16:12 +0900, TAMURA Kent wrote: >In message "Re: Clarify `UTF-8'" > on 00/07/07, "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> writes: > > I'm plodding through email in my inbox for the next version and unless you > > can provide a standard reference for UTF-8N we'll continue using the UTF-8 > > reference in the context of the XML specification that Boyer pointed out. > >I asked some Unicode people about standardization of UTF-8N. >But anyone did not know about it. We should use the name >'UTF-8' in the specification but I hope adding short note about >no-BOM to the specification. Yes, please explicitly note that wherever 'UTF-8' is used in the spec, this doesn't include a BOM. Regards, Martin.
Received on Monday, 10 July 2000 05:01:49 UTC