On Thursday, 18 February 2016 at 16:47:35 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 18 February 2016 at 16:41:52 UTC, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
for instance, quick often I find <80> in tests that are supposed to be valid xml 1.0. they are invalid xml 1.1 though

What char encoding does the document declare itself as?

It does not, it has no prolog and therefore no EncodingInfo.

unix file says it is a utf8 encoded file, but not BOM is present.

Reply via email to