On Thu, 08 Oct 1998 06:04:59 EDT, "Al Costanzo" said: > I have pondered the request to not use utf-8 and use base64. Um.. Is this one request, or two? utf-8 is a *charset*, just like iso8859-1 or us-ascii. base64 is a content-transfer-encoding, used to keep brain-dead MTAs from screwing up your utf-8, or iso8859-1, or other non-7-bit-clean charset/binary data. > LZJU90 uses UTF-8 because brain dead mailers will only understand > the 7 bit ascii subset of UTF-8 where mailers that understand utf-8 > will make better use of the encoder. Can you please re-explain this? There appears to be a confusion regarding the difference between a charset and a CTE. A compression algorithm should be totally immune to charset issues (otherwise, how would you compress a binary object?). > Could someone expand on the reason utf-8 should be not used? For what it's worth, your mail showed up with a base64 encoding wrapped around what was *flagged* as charset=utf-8. However, RFC2045, section 4.1.2, states: In general, composition software should always use the "lowest common denominator" character set possible. For example, if a body contains only US-ASCII characters, it SHOULD be marked as being in the US- ASCII character set, not ISO-8859-1, which, like all the ISO-8859 .... My MUA generated a warning message that utf-8 was an unknown charset, but tried its hardest to display it as 8859-1 (which just *happened* to suceed). Some MUAs throw up their hands entirely. That's why you shouldn't flag it as utf-8 unless it is needed. I didn't see any non us-ascii characters in the mail.. and after downgrading to us-ascii, the base64 CTE wasn't needed either. /Valdis (who now gets to go figure out why his MUA was able to display the base64/utf-8 correctly, but Lost Big Time on the reply...)
Attachment:
pgp00023.pgp
Description: PGP signature