From: John H. Jenkins (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 20 2005 - 13:27:22 CST
On Jan 20, 2005, at 7:14 AM, Hans Aberg wrote:
> First of all, I want the BOM requirement to be dropped from UTF-8. Or
> a new variation of UTF-8 which does not have a BOM requirement. (This
> approach seems not prudent, as one should keep down the number of
There is no BOM requirement for UTF-8. It's optional, just as it is
with UTF-16 (and, for that matter, UTF-32). Check the FAQ,
Having said that, I must confess to be slightly surprised at the level
of heat here. Neither Windows nor Unix is evil or non-compliant because
of their conventions regarding UTF-8 and BOMs. They're just different.
There are advantages to each way of doing things. 'Nuff said.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 20 2005 - 13:28:11 CST