Again, meant to send to the list...the caffeine hasn't hit my brain yet.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Jon Gorman<jonathan.gor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Jon Gorman<jonathan.gor...@gmail.com> wrote >> It doesn't look like valid utf-8. Utf-8 doesn't have a single f9 >> character. (It will end being a two byte code, but that doesn't look >> like the case here. Most of the characters are >> > ^^^ oops. > > Meant to say, in this file it looks like most of the characters are a > single-byte, so it's not the fact that utf-8 got confused for utf-16. > I see that happen on occasion when using with certain products that > tend to always use utf-16. I see some other characters that do appear > to be unicode and correct (c3a8 -> U+00a8 -> LATIN SMALL LETTER E WITH > GRAVE). > > > Jon Gorman >
