24120 2013-12-16 23:00:02 +0000 The Encoding Standard only recognizes utf-16le and utf-16be. This should just refer to those if this is needed at all. 2015-09-01 06:04:03 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED MOVED http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#a-utf-16-encoding P3 normal 2016 Q1 1 contributor annevk annevk d ian mike contributor oldest_to_newest 97708 0 contributor 2013-12-16 23:00:02 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/infrastructure.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#a-utf-16-encoding Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#a-utf-16-encoding Referrer: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/urls.html Comment: The Encoding Standard only recognizes utf-16le and utf-16be. This should just refer to those if this is needed at all. Posted from: 2.31.25.203 by annevk@annevk.nl User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 97709 1 annevk 2013-12-16 23:00:50 +0000 Is it really too problematic to refer to either utf-16be or utf-16be? I could introduce a term for both of them in the Encoding Standard I suppose... 97719 2 ian 2013-12-16 23:38:32 +0000 it's not just UTF-16BE or UTF-16LE, it's "UTF-16BE or UTF-16LE, regardless of whether a BOM is present, and regardless of what label is used". Or as the spec puts it, "any variant of UTF-16: UTF-16LE or UTF-16BE, regardless of the presence or absence of a BOM". What's the problem with having a term defined here? I don't understand. 97720 3 annevk 2013-12-16 23:42:55 +0000 Once you have an encoding, BOMs or labels are irrelevant. BOMs and labels are used to decode and get an encoding. 97936 4 ian 2014-01-02 20:47:38 +0000 I understand that that's true in theory, but this is one of those places where the spec uses a sledgehammer to drive the point home because people kept having questions about it. 98028 5 annevk 2014-01-06 14:04:03 +0000 I think they had questions about it because at the time the Encoding Standard was less established. I'm fine with resolving this for later though. 122937 6 annevk 2015-09-01 06:04:03 +0000 https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/66