From: Kai Henningsen (kaih@khms.westfalen.de)
Date: Tue Oct 22 2002 - 02:13:00 CDT
rra@stanford.edu (Russ Allbery) wrote on 21.10.02 in <ylbs5n1q3n.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>:
> Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
>
> > But the problem with that approach is that people will undoubtedly
> > implement, and make work, *something*, but it will not be UTF-8. It will
> > be "guess the charset", or "we use this code in this hierarchy".
>
> If that's the only approach that people are willing to implement, then
> obviously UTF-8 is the wrong choice. If UTF-8 is the right approach,
> people will be willing to implement it.
"If the only solutions people are willing to implement (without being
pushed) are strictly local solutions that cannot meaningfully cooperate,
then obviously global solutions are the wrong choice."
Or even more plainly, "if people are only willing to "fix" things in
clearly wriong ways, obviously right fixes are wrong."
It seems to me one doesn't need to be a professor for logic to spot the
flaw in this kind of argument. Or, put differently, your "obvious" doesn't
seem to have more in common with my "obvious" except the spelling.
MfG Kai