On 06/04/2001 02:10:35 AM Doug Ewell wrote:
>While we are at it, here's another argument against the existence of both
>UTF-8 and this new UTF-8s. Recently there was a discussion about the use
of
>the U+FEFF signature in UTF-8 files, with a fair number of Unicode experts
>arguing against its necessity because UTF-8 is so easy to detect
>heuristically. Without reopening that debate, it is worth noting that
UTF-8s
>could not be distinguished from UTF-8 by that technique...
I hope some UTC members are listening to these arguments, particularly some
that weren't already strongly opposed to the UTF-8s proposal.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:17:18 EDT