- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 12:31:07 -0400
- To: MURATA Makoto <muraw3c@attglobal.net>
- CC: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@gate.sinica.edu.tw>, xml-editor@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org
MURATA Makoto wrote: > RFC 2871 is already an RFC. In my understanging, people are > trying to throw away the BOM by introducing charset names "utf-16le" > and "utf-16be". Some people have already thrown away the BOM. RFC 2871 introduces names for the results of doing so. > If the handling of UTF-16LE/UTF-16BE is mandatory, the XML processor > is required to handle new octet sequences. I do not think all exising > processors can handle "<?xml encoding="UTF-16LE"?>" in UTF-16LE. No processor can be required to handle UTF-16LE/BE, only UTF-16 (and UTF-8). -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
Received on Thursday, 6 April 2000 12:31:01 UTC