[rfc-i] Byte order marks

Tony Hansen tony at att.com
Wed Nov 5 09:05:49 PST 2008


With the type being specified by the .utf8 extension, we could avoid the
need for a BOM.

	Tony Hansen
	tony at att.com

Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Tony Hansen <tony at att.com> writes:
> 
>> Just like we can have a .pdf alternative to the .txt file, could we also
>> have a .utf8 alternative to the .txt file?
> 
> That sounds like a good compromise to me.
> 
> It allows us to build up some experience with non-ASCII encoding of I-Ds
> before taking the bigger step of changing *.txt to be UTF-8.
> 
> But no UTF-8 BOM please. :-)
> 
> /Simon


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list