That's not what the official unicode site says in its FAQ: http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#bom4 and http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#bom<http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#bom4> 5
Cheers, -Tako On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 15:18, malcolm.wallace <[email protected]>wrote: > BOM is not part of UTF8, because UTF8 is byte-oriented. But applications > should be prepared to read and discard it, because some applications > erroneously generate it. > > > Regards, > Malcolm > > > On 04 Apr, 2011,at 02:09 PM, Antoine Latter <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Max Bolingbroke > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 4 April 2011 11:34, Daniel Fischer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> If there's only a single encoding recognised, UTF-8 surely should be the > >> one (though perhaps Windows users might disagree, iirc, Windows uses > UCS2 > >> as standard encoding). > > > > Windows APIs use UTF-16, but the encoding of files (which is the > > relevant point here) is almost uniformly UTF-8 - though of course you > > can find legacy apps making other choices. > > > > Would we need to specifically allow for a Windows-style leading BOM in > UTF-8 documents? I can never remember if it is truly a part of UTF-8 > or not. > > > Cheers, > > Max > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
