[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le
|
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
|
Subject: |
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le |
|
Date: |
Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:32:09 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
> Can we please come up with some more self-explanatory names, and lose
> the confusing le vs -le thing? Please?
That would be nice, indeed. Also the encoding that use a BOM should not
just ignore the first char, but should only do so if the first char is
indeed a BOM.
Stefan
utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/13