From: J.B. Moreno (planb@newsreaders.com)
Date: Fri Sep 21 2001 - 10:16:15 CDT
On 9/21/01 4:15 AM, Per Abrahamsen at <abraham@dina.kvl.dk> wrote:
> The newsgroup dk.test.utf8-זרו has passed, and a control message have
> been posted.
>
> Early response:
>
> The newsbastard on the main Danish ISP reports that the control
> message was rejected by INN, and the other major Danish INN sites I
> have access to doesn't have it either. I'm not sure that they process
> dk.* newgroups automatically, though.
>
> A "Changi" (whatever that is) administrator reports that the control
> message was processed correctly, and he gave me access so I could test
> (with telnet) that the group is there under the right name, and I can
> read and post (again with telnet).
It's a Windows NT/OS2 news server -- seems to have been abandoned.
> A user on a fourth major Danish ISP report that the group is on their
> "experimental" server, but I don't know how it got there.
>
> A news.supernews.com user report that the group is on that server as
> well, again no details.
Curt Welch's NewsReader.Com is carrying the group, allowing me to read and
post to it without trouble.
> On the client side, MSOE users report that they can see the group
> (poorly, the UTF-8 bytes presented as Latin-1), but not post there.
> MSOE will MIME-encode the newsgroup name.
Netscape is pretty much the same -- but it shows the name correctly when
viewing the article.
> XNews users have also reported that it doesn't work, no details.
I know that Xnews 4.04.02 does NOT have a problem reading/posting to a UTF8
group, not sure about other versions.
> I can post to the group with Gnus, but only with the CVS version, and
> not in the default setup. And the name is presented wrong. And I
> have have to manually enter the right name to post, overwriting the
> wrong name that is presented. I.e. most Gnus users would not be able
> to post.
Hopefully that will change as the development version progress.
> Early summary: very little works, both on the client side (as
> expected), but apparently also on the server side (which is worse).
At least the messages to the group seem to be propagating in an acceptable
manner.
-- J.B. Moreno