[Bug 26614] change "violation of Unicode" notes to something less scary (per Unicode)


--- Comment #6 from Addison Phillips <addison@lab126.com> ---
For reference, here is Asmus's note, which he gave permission to include here:

The first note refers to a SHOULD specification in UTS#22. It would be
overstating to call it a "violation" to deviate from it.

If I understand the issue correctly is that you need the BOM to be able to
override conflicting external designations.
Hence, an encoding is only "known" to be correctly labeled when it doesn't
contradict an internal BOM. Otherwise, you implicitly treat the declared
encoding as erroneous.

Seems a fine approach by me, given the realities.

Those are my 2 cents.


You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Monday, 25 August 2014 16:15:44 UTC