RE: charset question (Greek)

> -----Original Message-----
> >That would be bad - I'm currently working with two (different) SMSC
> >protocols that both use some sort of text for transfer : 
> weirdly encoded
> >ASCII or utf-8. if you lug the messages around in binary, whenever a
> >non-standard SMSC protocol comes along you'll have to do 
> lotsa recoding
> >in the module itself.
> 
> 
> A library function would be sufficient to handle this. So its not 
> lots of recoding. We do lots of recoding already in kannel for no 
> reason. And it makes current kannel non transparent which I consider 
> pretty bad way to go.

That's true too. but I don't see how working with binary data internally
(recoding to binary on entry, converting from binary to text whenever
some processing needs to be done - and then back to binary, converting
to driver-specific format at the end) is better then using unicode
internally (recoding to unicode if needed at entrance, using common
routines for processing, recoding to driver-specific format at the end).
Also - you have to consider MMS gateways which are bound to use some
kind of text oriented transports like XML over something (you can't
fight he power of hype ;-)

--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise Inc.
[email protected]

If you are a fatalist, what can you do about it?
	-- Ann Edwards-Duff