Subject:
|
Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Aug 2000 21:32:15 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm.org#NoSpam#
|
Viewed:
|
3809 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> > Brad, this is not iso-8859-1, as the header claims. It's Microsoft's
> > proprietary character set, which does not render as you expect on other
> > operating systems. See: <http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demoroniser/>.
> > What looks like dashes and apostrophes on MS Windows are actually supposed
> > to be control characters according to the Unicode standard and ISO 8859.
For the record, I decided that this post was more noise than necessary and
canceled it (and sent a private message). But since you replied anyway... :)
> thrilled about putting a demoronizer in on the NNTP-incoming side, since
> the articles' origins are purely external there, but on the HTTP-incoming
> side, where stuff is interactive and it has to do things like line-wrapping
> already (to work around problematic browsers that don't do this at the
> client side), the text could be demoronized right as it was received, or,
> alternatively, the message could be rejected (with an explanation) if it
> was moronized. I wonder which way is the better way to go.
Either one would make me happier. I'd prefer it done on the NNTP side, but I
understand your hesitation there. I'd suggest demoronizing the messages
automatically and giving a terse explanation. Rejecting the articles
completely would be nice from a fight-Microsoft point of view, but it seems
like it might be a bit vindictive -- the poor user almost certainly isn't
doing it intentionally.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
Boston University Linux ---> http://linux.bu.edu/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
