XML character encoding (was "Re: no worries")

The sentiment, if a bit overstated, is correct IMHO. Another
disadvantage is an XML file encoded in UTF-16 must begin with a byte
order mark (U+FEFF). Does the operating system handle that? Does the
XML editor? Do I?

The full name for UCS-4 in an XML declaration is "ISO-10646-UCS-4",
and this is one of the few places where XML is case insensitive. (So
a processor should recognize "ISO-10646-ucs-4" just as well.)

All that said, I don't know how to get my operating system to read &
write UCS-4 (or even UTF-16, not that I care), so I always use UTF-8.
:-|

> Allow me a technical consideration and advice. UTF-16 is only a
> useless historical artefact. It should not be used in any new
> project. The only sane choices are UTF-8 and (if really needed)
> UCS-4.
> 
> UTF-16 is the worst of all encodings: it wastes bits like UCS-2/4,
> is incompatible with ASCII and is as computationally hard to work
> with as UTF-8.
> 
> One should use either UTF-8 for ASCII compatibility and space
> savings or UCS-4 for speed of computation (but only under certain
> particular circumstances).