From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: tomas@tuxteam.de Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: 23.0.60; [nxml] BOM and utf-8 Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 10:22:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20080527082253.GC4034@tomas> References: <87od75kt78.fsf@pdrechsler.de> <87d4nk8y3q.fsf@everybody.org> <87r6bvs3jj.fsf@pdrechsler.de> <87mymjs2qw.fsf@pdrechsler.de> <20080522041745.GA29437@tomas> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1211878071 4068 80.91.229.12 (27 May 2008 08:47:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 08:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, Patrick Drechsler , tomas@tuxteam.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 27 10:48:31 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K0ur8-0005gj-Am for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 10:48:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59507 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K0uqN-0000V1-6U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K0uqI-0000Td-27 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:38 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K0uqE-0000QU-In for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50837 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K0uqD-0000Pg-DO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:45005) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K0uqD-00076R-2T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]:39039 helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1K0uob-0004DP-H4 for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:45:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K0uqA-00075V-6E for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:32 -0400 Original-Received: from [217.22.192.125] (port=42176 helo=www.elogos.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K0uq9-00074p-Qr; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:30 -0400 Original-Received: by www.elogos.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D7CB554004; Tue, 27 May 2008 10:22:53 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Greylist: delayed 1620 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at monty-python; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:28 EDT X-Greylist: delayed 1621 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at monty-python; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:29 EDT X-Greylist: delayed 1476 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at monty-python; Tue, 27 May 2008 04:47:29 EDT X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:97789 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:22451 Archived-At: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 01:33:21PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > tomas@tuxteam.de writes: > >> > | [...] XML processors MUST be able to use this character = to > >> > | differentiate between UTF-8 and UTF-16 encoded documents. > >> > `---- > > > > ...and how are the XML processors supposed to achieve that? Is there = a > > second variant of BOM, indicating UTF-8? >=20 > The encoding of BOM (incidentally, isn't this name for it obsolete?) is > different in utf-8 and utf-16. Stephen noticed as well: this was just the missing piece in my head :) (BTW: we might redefine the acronym to stand for "Bad Old Microsoft"?). Regards - -- tom=C3=A1s >=20 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIO8TdBcgs9XrR2kYRAvqtAJ9jf4XT5nAgAeeNGjgi9T0f27BkewCfX4HQ velBGbYVITaFqHsgGRhFlnA=3D =3D88Eg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----