Re: Stateful?

From: John H. Jenkins (
Date: Tue May 27 2008 - 17:27:04 CDT

  • Next message: Behnam: "Re: Markup for Language (was: Re: Exemplifying apostrophes)"

    On May 27, 2008, at 4:08 PM, Kenneth Whistler wrote:

    > John Jenkins said:
    >> UTF-16, after all, is stateful: if you lose the BOM,
    >> things can look very different.
    > That is true of the UTF-16 encoding *scheme*. (See TUS 5.0,
    > D98, p. 106.) That is because in the UTF-16 encoding scheme,
    > an initial BOM is itself a stateful switch for byte order.
    > UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE, on the other hand are not stateful.

    This is what I get for being careful to say "UTF-16" but not specify
    that I meant it specifically in contrast with UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE.

    John H. Jenkins

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 27 2008 - 17:29:15 CDT