Re: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)

From: Doug Ewell (dewell@adelphia.net)
Date: Sat Jan 22 2005 - 12:49:00 CST

Next message: Philippe VERDY: "Re: leading BOMs in encoding schemes (was: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8)"

Previous message: Lokesh Joshi: "Need help for Arabic text processing"
In reply to: Lars Kristan: "RE: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)"
Next in thread: Jon Hanna: "RE: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

RE: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)
Lars Kristan wrote:

> Peter Kirk wrote:
>
>> This is interesting speculation. But with any code page there are
>> bytes or combinations of bytes which are illegal or undefined in that
>> code page.
>
> In most SBCS encodings, there are none.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

-Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/

Next message: Philippe VERDY: "Re: leading BOMs in encoding schemes (was: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8)"
Previous message: Lokesh Joshi: "Need help for Arabic text processing"
In reply to: Lars Kristan: "RE: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)"
Next in thread: Jon Hanna: "RE: Conformance (was UTF, BOM, etc)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 22 2005 - 12:52:05 CST