Re: Corrigendum #9

From: Doug Ewell <>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:08:45 -0700

Richard Wordingham <richard dot wordingham at ntlworld dot com> wrote:

> At present there is no certainty as to whether
> an interchanged file in the UTF-16 encoding scheme that appears to
> contain a BOM contains a BOM or starts with U+FFFE. The only
> promise is that such a file contains an even number of data bytes.
> Any such sequence is valid! Will the UTF-16 encoding scheme be
> withdrawn?

One might wonder, given how frequently we hear that unpaired surrogates
also occur in the wild and need to be tolerated.

Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | @DougEwell
Unicode mailing list
Received on Thu Jun 26 2014 - 12:09:59 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jun 26 2014 - 12:10:00 CDT