Re: Names for UTF-8 with and without BOM

From: John Cowan (
Date: Sat Nov 02 2002 - 19:45:47 EST

  • Next message: Stefan Persson: "Re: Header Reply-To"

    Tex Texin scripsit:

    > So when the parser gets JOECODE, I can understand ignoring the signature
    > and autodetection, but exactly how does it find the first "<"?

    Well, if it begins with an 00 byte, it can't be UTF-8 or UTF-16 (it might
    be UTF-32 big-endian, but we'll suppose the parser can't handle that).
    JOECODE is what's left. At worst it is in some other encoding and/or
    not well-formed, in which case you expect an error and you get one.
    Of course the processor knows that "<" is encoded as 0xFF in JOECODE....

    The point is that signatures don't decode to a character: processors in
    general, not just XML processors, are expected to skip them.

    > It must have to try all of the encodings known to it... ugh.

    In such a bad case, that's all you can do.

    John Cowan
    Promises become binding when there is a meeting of the minds and consideration
    is exchanged. So it was at King's Bench in common law England; so it was
    under the common law in the American colonies; so it was through more than
    two centuries of jurisprudence in this country; and so it is today. 
           --_Specht v. Netscape_

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 20:21:52 EST