Guido van Rossum writes: > Well, I believe that for XML everybody (editors and other processors) > looks in the same place, right? It also assumes a pretty strict set of expected characters: If you don't have UTF-8, you have: [byte-order-mark] "<?xml " [version-spec] [encoding-spec] [standalog-spec] "?>" Basically, the encoding can be discovered very easily given an assumption about legal content. Once that assumption doesn't hold, the encoding can't be discovered reliably. We could probably make a pretty reasonable statement of how to auto-detect enough so that Python files could have an encoded declaration (however we spell it), but it's hard to beat the assumption of mandated structure. (Some assumption, huh? ;) -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Digital Creations
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4