Thanks. This is fixed in the latest draft of the content type sniffing rules, available here:
http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/mime-sniff/mime-sniff.txt Adam On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Dan Winship <[email protected]> wrote: > In the summary table at the end of "2.7.4 Content-Type sniffing: unknown > type", the UTF-16LE BOM is incorrectly listed as "FF FF" instead of "FF > FE". (The UTF-16BE BOM is correct, and the UTF-16LE one is stated > correctly earlier in the text): > > FF FF 00 00 FE FF 00 00 text/plain n/a UTF-16BE BOM > FF FF 00 00 FF FF 00 00 text/plain n/a UTF-16LE BOM > ^^ > FF FF FF 00 EF BB BF 00 text/plain n/a UTF-8 BOM > > -- Dan >
