bin en fait, j'ai approfondie ma recherche sur le site unicode.org et ce n'est pas illégal d'avoir ce BOM :
Q: Can a UTF-8 data stream contain the BOM character (in UTF-8 form)? If yes, then can I still assume the remaining UTF-8 bytes are in big-endian order?
A: Yes, UTF-8 can contain a BOM. However, it makes no difference as to the endianness of the byte stream. UTF-8 always has the same byte order. An initial BOM is only used as a signature an indication that an otherwise unmarked text file is in UTF-8. Note that some recipients of UTF-8 encoded data do not expect a BOM. Where UTF-8 is used transparently in 8-bit environments, the use of a BOM will interfere with any protocol or file format that expects specific ASCII characters at the beginning, such as the use of "#!" of at the beginning of Unix shell scripts.
Ils previennent bien que ca va foutre la merde, mais c'est pas grave!
[^] # Re: [PBM UNICODE] Quelqu'un pour me confirmer?
Posté par B r u n o (site web personnel) . En réponse au journal [PBM UNICODE] Quelqu'un pour me confirmer?. Évalué à 2.
Ils previennent bien que ca va foutre la merde, mais c'est pas grave!
Donc il faut se coltiner ce cas spécial.