Martin v. Löwis wrote: >>> Yes, an XML parser should be able to use UTF-8, UTF-16, UTF-32, etc >>> codecs to do the encoding. There's no need to create a magical >>> mystery codec to pick out which though. >> So the code is good, if it is inside an XML parser, and it's bad if it >> is inside a codec? > > Exactly so. This functionality just *isn't* a codec - there is no > encoding. Instead, it is an algorithm for *detecting* an encoding. And what do you do once you've detected the encoding? You decode the input, so why not combine both into an XML decoder? Servus, Walter
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