[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: printable wide character (was "multibyte") encodings
To: Rick Troth <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: printable wide character (was "multibyte") encodings
Date: Thu, 13 May 93 22:35:26 CDT
> Keith, you left this part out:
> >> The point is
> >> that the richtext parser's front-end "get a character"
> >> primitive would get a wide, multioctet character. (The
> >> special '<' character would therefore appear as a 16- or
> >> 32-bit quantity with value 60).
> This is the part to which I specifically agree, saying:
> > Yes!
> The reasoning is:
> >> Recalling the proper
> >> definition of "byte", however, we can if we wish continue
> >> to think about byte streams, as long as we remember that
> >> a byte may have more than 8 bits. ...
> And if SMTP remains an "octet stream", fine.
> (I think we're closer in agreement than you think we are)
Perhaps I was being imprecise.
I am specifically opposed to having the canonical form of a MIME
content-type be anything other than an octet-stream. This implies
that all content-transfer-encoders take an octet-stream as input.
"You can have any kind of byte you want, as long as it is 8 bits :-)"