Aaron Denney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It provides variants of UTF-16/32 with and without a BOM, but
>> UTF-8 only has the variant with a BOM. This makes UTF-8 a stateful
>> encoding.
>
> I think you mean "UTF-8 only has the variant without a BOM".
No, unfortunately. Unicode standard section 3.10 defines encoding
schemes:
- UTF-8 (with a BOM)
- UTF-16BE (without a BOM)
- UTF-16LE (without a BOM)
- UTF-16 (with a BOM)
- UTF-32BE (without a BOM)
- UTF-32LE (without a BOM)
- UTF-32 (with a BOM)
It says about UTF-8 BOM: "Its usage at the beginning of a UTF-8 data
stream is neither required nor recommended by the Unicode Standard,
but its presence does not affect conformance to the UTF-8 encoding
scheme."
IMHO it would be fair if it had two variants of UTF-8 encoding scheme,
just like it has three variants of UTF-16/32, so it would be unambiguous
whether "UTF-8" in a particular context allows BOM or not.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
