[jdev] BOM

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Waqas Hussain wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Jonathan Dickinson
> <jonathan.dickinson at k2.com> wrote:
>>
>> What's the official stance on BOM (Byte order marks)? I have had to
>> specifically remove them because most client (e.g. Cocinnella) sporadically
>> break if they are there (strangely, first time you try to log in, after that
>> it's fine).
>>
>> The client says unexpected char "[]" (where the block is an 'unprintable'),
>> so I assume it's the BOM.
> 
> While RFC 3920 [XMPP] doesn't say anything about byte order marks, RFC
> 3629 [UTF-8] does suggest:
> 
>    o  A protocol SHOULD forbid use of U+FEFF as a signature for those
>       textual protocol elements that the protocol mandates to be always
>       UTF-8, the signature function being totally useless in those
>       cases.
> 
> I don't think the use of the byte order marks in an XMPP stream was
> ever intended by the protocol designers. This looks like an oversight
> and should be explicitly specified in the XMPP RFC.

Duly noted. I'll fix this in the next version of rfc3920bis. I'll also
review RFC 3629 to see if there is anything else we need to call out in
rfc3920bis.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/