"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote: > > .xml UTF-8N Some XML processors may not cope with BOM > > Maybe they need to upgrade? Since people often edit the files in notepad, > many files are going to have it. A parser that cannot accept this reality is > not going to make it very long.
I didn't think the XML standard allowed for utf-8 files to have a BOM. The standard is quite clear about requiring 0xFEFF for utf-16. I would have thought a proper parser would reject a non-utf-16 file beginning with something other than "<". (The fact that notepad puts it there should be irrelevant.) Am I wrong about XML and the utf-8 signature? tex -- ------------------------------------------------------------- Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@;XenCraft.com Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com Making e-Business Work Around the World -------------------------------------------------------------
