Re: Names for UTF-8 with and without BOM

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (
Date: Sat Nov 02 2002 - 13:15:54 EST

  • Next message: Joseph Boyle: "RE: Names for UTF-8 with and without BOM"

    From: "Joseph Boyle" <>

    > Type Encoding Comment
    > .txt UTF-8BOM We want plain text files to have BOM to distinguish
    > from legacy codepage files

    Not really required, but optional -- the perfomance hit of making sure its
    valid UTF-8 is pretty minor. But people do open some *huge* text files in
    things like notepad....

    > .xml UTF-8N Some XML processors may not cope with BOM

    Maybe they need to upgrade? Since people often edit the files in notepad,
    many files are going to have it. A parser that cannot accept this reality is
    not going to make it very long.

    > .htm UTF-8 We want HTML to be UTF-8 but will not insist on BOM

    Same as text, with the bonus of the possiblity of a higher lever protocol.
    It can still go either way.

    > .rc Codepage Unfortunately compiler insists on these being
    > codepage.

    They can be UTF-16, too (at least on Win32!).

    > .swt ASCII Nonlocalizable internal format, must be ASCII.

    Haven't run across these -- but note that if its not UTF-8 then it does not

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 13:47:00 EST