These are listed as examples to demonstrate the idea of a configuration file listing encoding constraints. The fact that each constraint is arguable is a good reason to make the constraints configurable, and therefore to have names to distinguish BOM and non-BOM UTF-8.
-----Original Message----- From: Michael (michka) Kaplan [mailto:michka@;trigeminal.com] Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 10:16 AM To: Joseph Boyle; Mark Davis; Murray Sargent Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Names for UTF-8 with and without BOM From: "Joseph Boyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Type Encoding Comment > .txt UTF-8BOM We want plain text files to have BOM to distinguish from > legacy codepage files Not really required, but optional -- the perfomance hit of making sure its valid UTF-8 is pretty minor. But people do open some *huge* text files in things like notepad.... > .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. > .htm UTF-8 We want HTML to be UTF-8 but will not insist on BOM Same as text, with the bonus of the possiblity of a higher lever protocol. It can still go either way. > .rc Codepage Unfortunately compiler insists on these being codepage. They can be UTF-16, too (at least on Win32!). > .swt ASCII Nonlocalizable internal format, must be ASCII. Haven't run across these -- but note that if its not UTF-8 then it does not apply....
