- From: François Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:47:39 -0500
- To: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@bigfoot.com>, <xml-editor@w3.org>
Your case "0xFF 0xFE 0x3C 0x00" matches the following case from the table in Appendix F: "FF FE ## ## UTF-16, little-endian". As explained just above the table, ## stands in for any byte, except that ## ## doesn't math "00 00"; it does match "3C 00", however. -- François Yergeau > -----Message d'origine----- > De : xml-editor-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-editor-request@w3.org]De la > part de Rob Lugt > Envoyé : 8 novembre, 2000 18:10 > À : xml-editor@w3.org > Objet : XML Conformance Test > > > We have been using the Oasis XML conformance suite to test our > Parser. This > has exposed a potential error in our implementation and we would like some > clarification. > > The Oasis test file: xmltest/valid/sa/049.xml contains a Byte Order Mark, > the first 4 octets are:- 0xFF 0xFE 0x3C 0x00 > > The 2nd edition of the XML1.0 recommendation lists these possible > Byte Order > Marks:- > > 00 00 FE FF UCS-4, big-endian machine (1234 order) > FF FE 00 00 UCS-4, little-endian machine (4321 order) > 00 00 FF FE UCS-4, unusual octet order (2143) > FE FF 00 00 UCS-4, unusual octet order (3412) > FE FF ## ## UTF-16, big-endian > FF FE ## ## UTF-16, little-endian > EF BB BF UTF-8 > > None of these match the Byte Order Mark in 049.xml. Can you tell > us what is > right, the test file or the XML 1.0 recomendation? > > Regards > Rob Lugt > ElCel Technology > > >
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2000 17:48:02 UTC