[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: UTF-8 BOM
From: "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...> > Actually, I think that the UTF-8 BOM is a deeply stupid idea that > serves no useful purpose in any imaginable universe. We wouldn't > be thinking about were it not for the fact that MS Notepad happens > to write one for UTF-8 documents. Yes. I think what we are seeing a clarification in layering. XML started with various kinds of errors (WF, validity, "for compability", etc.) Things like UTF-8 BOMs belong in entity management (like line-feed handling, transcoding, and Unicode normalization) that should be as transparent to XML as possible. XML does really well in this regard: the XML-in-MIME RFCS and the use of Unicode have served us well I think. One of the nice things about hierarchical markup is that it reduces the times when character indexing and line counting is useful or significant. So we don't need to freak out if a dumb transcoder makes a character out of a signal (as in the BOM case) as we might have to character- or byte-indexing was the basis of our systems. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|