Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8

From: Hans Aberg (
Date: Thu Jan 20 2005 - 08:14:48 CST

  • Next message: Lars Kristan: "RE: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"

    On 2005/01/20 12:41, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk at wrote:

    > That's why BOM is being ignored. It cannot be transparently handled
    > by the recoding machinery, so each program would have to handle it
    > itself. And it's impossible conceptually in cases where "the beginning
    > of the text stream" is not a well-defined concept - programs won't
    > be "fixed" because there is no correct fix, other than rejecting the
    > idea of UTF-8 BOM.

    I think that you have raised some important points, but is a good one:The
    strength of UNIX is its ability to treat parallel processes in the form of
    streams. One cannot easily tell when append a BOM in order to make it look
    as every stream has a BOM at the very beginning. There is no easy way to
    tell a file from a stream in general.

    Unicode has thought about simple file handling for text editors and the
    like, but not given though to a parallel streams processing model. Oops, a
    little oversight; excluding the major future computing model. :-)

      Hans Aberg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 20 2005 - 08:16:48 CST