[whatwg] typo in UTF-16LE BOM sniffing rule

[Adam Barth]

Thanks.  This is fixed in the latest draft of the content type
sniffing rules, available here:

http://webblaze.cs.berkeley.edu/2009/mime-sniff/mime-sniff.txt

Adam


On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Dan Winship <dan.winship at gmail.com> wrote:
> In the summary table at the end of "2.7.4 Content-Type sniffing: unknown
> type", the UTF-16LE BOM is incorrectly listed as "FF FF" instead of "FF
> FE". (The UTF-16BE BOM is correct, and the UTF-16LE one is stated
> correctly earlier in the text):
>
> FF FF 00 00     FE FF 00 00     text/plain      n/a     UTF-16BE BOM
> FF FF 00 00     FF FF 00 00     text/plain      n/a     UTF-16LE BOM
>                   ^^
> FF FF FF 00     EF BB BF 00     text/plain      n/a     UTF-8 BOM
>
> -- Dan
>