Henry S. Thompson scripsit:
> My sense is that you'll see more UTF-16 BOMs than anything else.
I agree.
> UTF-32 support seems to be waning (at least in the browsers), but
> UTF-16 is in pretty widespread use. John, do you think you can fool
> google into counting BOMs for us?
No, because Google transcodes everything into UTF-8 as soon as it starts
to process it. What I can say (auct. Mark Davis) is that UTF-16 documents
in all formats represent much less than 0.1% of the searchable Web.
By contrast, UTF-8 (including ASCII) amounts to 80% of it. This reflects
actual rather than declared encodings, and is as of January 2012.
--
So they play that [tune] on John Cowan
their fascist banjos, eh? cowan@xxxxxxxx
--Great-Souled Sam http://www.ccil.org/~cowan