Helge Hafting wrote: > I thought UTF-8 didn't care about endianness, being a single-byte > encoding?
That would be great: stuffing the whole unicode range in a single-byte encoding, but for obvious reasons that does not work. You are right that the endianness is not a problem in utf8, since it does not directly translate a 16bit (ucs2) or 32bit (ucs4) value to a sequence of bytes in the file. > A conversion to UCS-4 can go wrong if he convert > to the wrong UCS-4 format, but utf-8 is supposed to be > the same no matter what endianness the machine uses? Yes. Georg
