From: J.B. Moreno (planb@newsreaders.com)
Date: Wed Mar 05 2003 - 12:38:14 CST
On 3/5/03 10:15 AM, Bruce Lilly at <blilly@erols.com> wrote:
> J.B. Moreno wrote:
>> while dropping 15% of the feed as "non-compliant" is fine, accepting
>> 0.017% of that 15% would be unacceptable because half of that 0.017% would
>> be mis-identified,
>
> A 0.006% solution is for all practical purposes the same as no solution
> at all. That's not a political issue; it's an engineering fact.
If it was an just an engineering fact then people would be arguing that it's
a waste of time to code such a test, not that it "is just another guess the
charset".
Both you and Crispin have complained about it being wrong half the time,
you've both called it "nothing more than a guess", neither of you have been
saying "Yeah, that would work, if people would just use it in significant
numbers".
The objection isn't to the fact that people aren't using it, the objection
is to the idea that they might /start/ using it because of us.
-- J.B. Moreno