From: Dave Crocker (dcrocker@brandenburg.com)
Date: Sat Jan 11 2003 - 14:57:27 CST
Erland,
Saturday, January 11, 2003, 12:22:56 PM, you wrote:
>> Cramming those bits into a 7-bit environment is just one more cramming
>> effort. It stands equal to the others as an alternative that has benefits
>> and detriments.
Erland> Why let it stop with 7 bits? Why not cram it into one bit, while you're
Erland> at it?
If this is is an example of the way discussions have gone on usefor, then
it's pretty clear why the technical work is in trouble.
7-bit netascii is a long-standing internet norm. that's why.
it would be extremely helpful for this topic to benefit from attention being
paid to deployed, real-world standards-based installed base.
>> If you do not have UTF-8 or UTF-16 tools, you cannot view the data at all.
Erland> Incorrect. If you have an 8-bit editor that does not understand UTF-8,
Erland> you will see the text, but it will look "ugly".
it would be extremely helpful for this topic to benefit from attention being
paid to deployed, real-world standards-based installed base.
Erland> The same applies if you have a any-bit editor which does not understand
Erland> RFC2047.
Erland> But:
Erland> 1) UTF-8 looks less ugly than RFC2047 when incorrectly displayed.
Unfortunately, this effort is not a computer science theoretical exercise.
it would be extremely helpful for this topic to benefit from attention being
paid to deployed, real-world standards-based installed base.
d/
-- Dave <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850