- From: C M Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:03:28 -0600
- To: xml-editor@w3.org
- CC: cmsmcq@acm.org
If this erratum in 4.3.3 is not on the list of known errata, it should be. -C. M. Sperberg-McQueen ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Return-Path: <w3c-xml-syntax-wg-request@w3.org> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 15:39:51 -0500 From: Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com> X-Sender: yergeau@www.alis.com To: w3c-xml-syntax-wg@w3.org Cc: mduerst@w3.org MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Subject: More errata Resent-From: w3c-xml-syntax-wg@w3.org X-Mailing-List: <w3c-xml-syntax-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/645 X-Loop: w3c-xml-syntax-wg@w3.org Sender: w3c-xml-syntax-wg-request@w3.org Resent-Sender: w3c-xml-syntax-wg-request@w3.org Precedence: list À 10:20 02/03/99 +0900, Martin J. Duerst a écrit : >Section 4.3.3 says that the BOM defined in Appendix B of Unicode, >which may have been true for Unicode 1.X, but is not true for Unicode >2, which is referenced in the Appendix. I pointed this out very close >to going to REC, but it was not corrected. As far as I remember, the >corresponding Appendix in ISO 10646 that is mentionned might also be >worth checking. I checked. The 10646 annex about the BOM is Annex F, not E. In Unicode, it is in section 2.4, not in Appendix B. - -- François ------- End of forwarded message -------
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 1999 12:03:31 UTC