On 07/21/2000 12:55:59 PM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The problem is that the labels where invented to tag data streams, not to
>'label' the result of autodetection. As you point out there are 4 results
of
>auto-detection:
>
>UTF-16, no BOM
>UTF-16, no BOM, but arriving in reverse byte order (for my processor)
>UTF-16 with BOM
>UTF-16 with BOM, arriving in reverse byte order (for my processor)
>
>When I send a data stream, I have these conditions
>
>1) don't know byte order
>a) send it out bare
>b) send it out with BOM
>
>2) do know byte order
>a) send it out with BOM, but don't tell recipient the byte order
>b) don't use bom, and TELL RECIPIENT the byte order in an external LABEL
>
>LABELS UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE are to be used for case 2b *only*.
>LABEL UTF-16 is required for 1a and b and 2a.
>
>The hypothetical case of TELLING the recipient the byte order *and* using
the
>BOM at the same time is not supported.
(EMPHASIS added - PC)
Now, this is precisely my point! These terms are what we *tell* a recipient
about our data, not something directly about the data themselves. The
explanations all sound like their about the data themselves, however, and
that makes things confusing.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
