To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 6720
6719  |  6721
Subject: 
Re: ???Question???
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Fri, 19 May 2000 09:40:03 GMT
Viewed: 
3359 times
  
do we need a admin.geek group?

In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Matthew Miller writes:
> > Urg. It may not be obvious to those of you viewing this message with MS
> > Windows, but the above message isn't ascii text (or ISO 8859-1 Latin-1,
> > either -- even though the header claims it is!). It's Microsoft's
> > non-standard [1] character set. This makes the message look pretty weird
> > when viewed on a non-MS system -- all of the apostrophes show up as question
> > marks (or don't show up at all).
> > 
> > Since asking everyone to not use Microsoft products to read LUGnet is
> > probably a bit harsh [2], Todd, how about automatically scanning for this
> > and correcting it when messages are posted?
> 
> Hmmmm.  I agree that it's pretty horrendous for plaintext, but I think that
> so-called "smart quotes" are a pretty great thing for HTML (as long as the
> correct standard character entities are output, of course! :) when done
> properly.
> 
> What currently happens in the web interface when someone views a message with
> these is that they get mapped into HTML entities like this:
> 
>   145 --> ‘
>   146 --> ’
>   147 --> “
>   148 --> ”
> 
> Unfortunately, those positions don't seem to be defined in HTML 3.2, so
> they'll only show up "correctly" (meaning, as intended by the author of
> the message) on non-MS systems when someone uses MS fonts or fonts with
> equivalent character mappings.
> 
> I'm happy to see that HTML 4.0 defines[1] these...
> 
>   &lsquo;  <==>   &#8216;   (equivalent to 145)
>   &rsquo;  <==>   &#8217;   (equivalent to 146)
>   &ldquo;  <==>   &#8220;   (equivalent to 147)
>   &rdquo;  <==>   &#8221;   (equivalent to 148)
> 
> ...but I haven't tested these in popular browsers to see if they're worth
> using yet.  I switched from &#153; to &#8482; for the TM symbol a while back
> and that has worked well.
> 
> 
> > There's an already existing tool:
> > <http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demoroniser/>
> > (That page also has more good info on the problem.)
> 
> I looked quickly at the source (admittedly, not a thorough scouring); it
> looks like the mapping it applies is non-invertible, especially in the case
> of 147 and 148.  :-(
> 
> It may be better simply to reject MS-moronised messages altogether than to
> attempt to convert it at the receiving end, because at least that way the
> original meaning isn't destroyed.  (Actually, I'm not in favor of either of
> those options anywhere near as much leaving the conversion up to each
> individual client on-the-fly at display-time.)
> 
> --Todd
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/sgml/entities.html



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: ???Question???
 
(...) Hmmmm. I agree that it's pretty horrendous for plaintext, but I think that so-called "smart quotes" are a pretty great thing for HTML (as long as the correct standard character entities are output, of course! :) when done properly. What (...) (26 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.general)

11 Messages in This Thread:




Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR