[R6RS] Source code encoding
Marc Feeley
feeley
Tue Mar 15 08:33:18 EST 2005
> Marc> I maintain that allowing UTF-16 + BOM and UTF-8 is a good compromise
> Marc> (it covers the two most popular Unicode file encodings, allows shell
> Marc> scripts, plain ASCII files need not be changed, and a wide range of
> Marc> editors can be used). We could however add that an initial BOM
> Marc> on a UTF-8 encoded file is ignored.
>
> I'm hesitant to use a meta-encoding that there's little experience
> with, so I guess I'm backpedalling to wanting only UTF-8. Are there
> any editors / IDEs that matter to Scheme that can't produce UTF-8?
I'm having a hard time understanding your change of position. You
were advocating the simultaneous support of several encodings (UTF-8 +
BOM, UTF-16 + BOM, Latin-1, and possibly UTF-32 + BOM) and rejected
using UTF-8 only because
> Manuel mentioned in Snowbird that it might be a bad idea to just pick
> UTF-8, as the standard Unicode encoding on Windows is UTF-16 + BOM.
Now you are advocating for using UTF-8 only. Why not allow UTF-16 +
BOM also, since it does not conflict in any way with UTF-8 and UTF-16
+ BOM is the norm on Windows for encoding Unicode text files? What is
the downside of supporting both of these popular Unicode encodings?
Marc
More information about the R6RS
mailing list