[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: UTF-8 BOM
> From: David Brownell [mailto:david-b@p...] <snip/> > I guess I'm thinking that a UTF-8 BOM would be a "new feature" that's > an error today. Hence it fits with the other > backwards-problematic stuff > in Blueberry ... though it's a "new feature" that's encoding-specific. Except that a UTF-8 BOM isn't really a new feature; it's just one that all too many implementors overlook. The XML 1.0 specification includes a non-normative appendix regarding autodetection of character encodings. It quite explicitly mentions the UTF-8 BOM as one of the things a processor should look for (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-guessing-no-ext-info). Unlike the issue with Blueberry, this isn't something new that's been added to Unicode since XML 1.0. It's just a failure of current implementations.
|
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
|