From: Henry N. <Henry.Ne@Arcor.de> - 2004-10-01 17:24:14
|
Dan Aloni wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 01:54:00PM +0100, Nuno Lucas wrote: > >>I don't think people understand the problem here. >>All we want is to avoid to have people complain colinux isn't >>booting because of a mysterious error (can't load file). >>To achieve this goal we have (at least) the following options: >> >>1- Follow the XML specification: >> >>1.a) Use another XML library that would give us a standard compliant >> implementation. >>1.b) Patch the XML library ourselves. > > > How mailing the library's maintainer? Hopefully the next version > would be still light but with less bugs in it. > Why we not use standard XML, such as static library? Think, this will be work better as this small version of mxml. http://mxml.sourceforge.net/ says it's only a "DOM oriented library". See also a good comparsion about BOM and DOM http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/notes/technote_encodings.html Actual we use UTF-8 without BOM-Mark. If we use a BOM-Mark, we need also a reader for 2-byte per char. See "What are some of the differences between the UTFs" in http://www.unicode.org/unicode/faq/utf_bom.html I have not a XML-Edidor, but I found, that we can force the type of encoding in header: <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8' ?> This should all editors give the rigth format for us. UTF-8 is EF BB BF Can anybody send me a file with UTF-16, created with a XML-Editor? (Please zip file before send, so I can see all bytes!) -- Henry Nestler XML only for german readers: http://www.sql-und-xml.de/xml-lernen/internationalisierung-unicode-sonderzeichen.html |