Re: UTS#40 (BOCU-1) ambiguity and possible serious bug about leading BOM

From: Markus Scherer (
Date: Wed Feb 07 2007 - 18:16:19 CST

  • Next message: Markus Scherer: "Re: UTS#40 (BOCU-1) special handling of large blocks"

    Thanks for the various good comments. If UTS #40 progresses or we roll
    an update to UTN #6 I will dig these out of my mailbox and incorporate

    Note that the signature issue is the same for all stateful charsets -
    like UTF-7 and SCSU. (Luckily for SCSU, it has a very good and now
    recommended way to encode an initial U+FEFF with SQU without
    disturbing the following characters.)

    Best regards,

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 07 2007 - 18:20:25 CST