[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?


More information about the R6RS mailing list