Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Brownell <db@Eng.Sun.COM>
- To: Miles Sabin <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 13:19:59 -0800
Miles Sabin wrote:
> Appendix F of the spec say that given a document
> starting with the 4 octet sequence,
> 00 3C 00 3F
> I'm to infer BOM-less big-endian UTF-16, and
> given a document starting with,
> 3C 00 3F 00
> I'm to infer BOM-less little-endian UTF-16.
That is, the appendix _suggests_ (in a non-normative
fashion) that's the way to go.
> What I what to know is: why could these
> sequences not equally represent (respectively)
> big-endian UCS-2 or little-endian UCS-2?
They could ...
> 1. Unicode == UTF-16
> 2. UCS-2 != UTF-16 (because UCS-2 lacks UTF-16's
> support for characters outside the BMP).
Put it this way: if you assume UTF-16, you're
safe either way because UTF-16 is a superset.
It'd be reasonable for an autodetecting algorithm
to support "downgrading" its guess from UTF-16 to
UCS-2, and should probably do so if it's reporting
encoding mismatches as fatal errors.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)