Joseph Boyle wrote:
> Newline problems are a good analogy. They still require bookkeeping of
> different formats and attention in any new coding and cause new bugs,
> even though the problem has been around for decades. Nobody is holding
> their breath for any of the platforms to change their new
Joseph Boyle wrote:
>
> Yes, the software business is largely about dealing with the BADLY WRITTEN,
> the TRIVIAL, and the BRAIN-DEAD. Your point?
I see we are still working on naming utf-8 formats with and without the
bom.
I find these quite acceptable, assuming you mean:
utf8-badly-written-
rager@;umich.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 9:19 AM
To: Unicode Mailing List
Subject: Re: PRODUCING and DESCRIBING UTF-8 with and without BOM
Hi, everyone,
It's almost unbelievable to me how many email postings are wasted on
discussions such as this UTF-8 BOM issue ... I guess it means
From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No, the notation to say "BOM required (report any files without BOM)",
"BOM
> not allowed (report any files with BOM)", or "BOM optional (only report
> files if they are not valid UTF-8 at all)", for a given file type.
Well, yes. If you wanted to avoid m
>> Yes, it's trivial to check. What's missing is the notation to tell the
>> checker what to check for.
>Sorry, but that is incorrect. If they know its UTF-8, then its either a BOM
or its not. It is three specific bytes.
No, the notation to say "BOM required (report any files without BOM)", "BO
Hi, everyone,
It's almost unbelievable to me how many email postings are wasted on
discussions such as this UTF-8 BOM issue ... I guess it means that there
is a lot of BADLY WRITTEN software out there in the world ;-)
With regard to READING incoming UTF-8 text streams, surely any good
software d
Joseph Boyle scripsit:
> I haven't encountered UTF-32, SCSU, UTF-7, or BOCU-1 as transfer encodings.
Alas, a member of one of the mailing lists I'm on is using an old version
of Netscape, and he ends up sending UTF-7 (unless he is very careful not to)
whenever he does anything non-ASCII.
The tro
ardize is irritating and unnecessary doesn't
make existing software go away.
-Original Message-
From: Michael (michka) Kaplan [mailto:michka@;trigeminal.com]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 8:08 AM
To: Joseph Boyle; Unicode Mailing List
Subject: Re: PRODUCING and DESCRIBING UTF-8 with an
Boyle; 'Michael (michka) Kaplan'
Subject: Re: PRODUCING and DESCRIBING UTF-8 with and without BOM
Joseph Boyle wrote:
> Software currently under development could use the identifiers for
> choosing whether to require or emit BOM, like the file requirements
> checker I have
From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes, it's trivial to check. What's missing is the notation to tell the
> checker what to check for.
Sorry, but that is incorrect. If they know its UTF-8, then its either a BOM
or its not. It is three specific bytes.
> Yes, this is a good description of
Joseph Boyle wrote:
> Software currently under development could use the identifiers for
> choosing whether to require or emit BOM, like the file requirements
> checker I have to write, and ICU/uconv.
Alternatively, software could use a completely separate flag to indicate
whether a BOM is to be
From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Joesph,
> Software currently under development could use the identifiers for
choosing
> whether to require or emit BOM, like the file requirements checker I have
to
> write, and ICU/uconv.
Lets separate that into the two issuse it represents:
EMITTING: T
: PRODUCING and DESCRIBING UTF-8 with and without BOM
From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Thanks for the dozens of responses discussing consumers' behavior on
> UTF-8 BOM. This is actually not what I'm concerned with, as I have to
> take it as
a
> g
From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Thanks for the dozens of responses discussing consumers' behavior on UTF-8
> BOM. This is actually not what I'm concerned with, as I have to take it as
a
> given that there is both software that wants UTF-8 BOM and software that
> doesn't want it.
>
> Cou
14 matches
Mail list logo
