I recently rediscovered this strange behaviour in Python’s Unicode handling.—Evan

►

-1; there’s no standard for UTF-8 BOMs—adding it to the codecs module was probably a mistake to begin with.—M.-A.

►

There is a standard for UTF-8 signatures, however.—Stephen

►

With the UTF-8-SIG codec, it would apply to all operation modes of the codec, whether stream-based or from strings.—"Martin

►

I had in mind the ability to treat a string as a stream.—Stephen

►

Hmm. A string is not a stream, but it could be the contents of a stream.—"Martin

►

Of course it must be supported.—Stephen

►

I can’t put these two paragraphs together.—"Martin

►

Because the signature/BOM is not a chunk, it’s a header.—Stephen

►

What is "that" which might be really feasible? To "solve Walter’s conundrum"? That "signatures make sense"?

So I can’t really respond to your message in a meaningful way; I just let it rest...

Regards, Martin—"Martin