[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Editing exportet registry files

From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: Re: Editing exportet registry files
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 01:38:04 +0200

On 7/2/05, Jason Rumney <address@hidden> wrote:
> Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden> writes:

> How common is it to have FF FE or FE FF as the first two characters in
> text in any other encoding?

Pretty uncommon. I haven't said otherwise. I'm just pointing out what
I suppose is the original reason to not putting the utf-16 encodings
higher up on the list.

> because of some theoretical worry that it
> might break a hypothetical case that I suspect will only exist in real
> life if someone deliberately sets out to break auto-detection.

I've not checked other encodings. Did you? Are you really sure that
all other frequently used 8-bit encodings put uncommon characters for
0xFF and 0xFE? Because the fact that they aren't ASCII doesn't mean
that they are infrequent in the target language.

> Nonsense. It is very unlikely that UTF-16-LE-WITH-SIGNATURE,
> UTF-16-BE-WITH-SIGNATURE, or even UTF-8 will falsely match any Latin
> (or cyrillic or probably Asian) encoding.

I lack the confidence that you apparently have. I suppose you're
better informed than me (I'm not being facetious). So just change it,
or propose it to be changed. (And perhaps it'd be wise to hear what
Handa-san thinks about it.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]