Re: First strawman for UTF-8 headers proposal

ditto on both

Mark
__________________________________
http://www.macchiato.com
► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Cowan" <[email protected]>
To: "IETF IMAA list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, 2003 Nov 27 19:39
Subject: Re: First strawman for UTF-8 headers proposal


>
> Adam M. Costello scripsit:
>
> > If the message store is a
> > plain text file, what chaos might ensue?  Perhaps the UTF-8 headers
> > should be segregated somehow, so they don't accidentally fool old
> > software into thinking it knows what to do with them.
>
> Note that "plain text" should not be used as a synonym for "ASCII
> plain text"; UTF-8 files are plain text if they contain a sequence of
> characters each used for its ordinary meaning, neither binary nor
> markup.
>
> > There is something that encoded-words can do that your UTF-8 header
> > proposal cannot do: encoded-words can indicate the language of the
> > text.
>
> Does anyone actually do anything useful with this part of RFC 2231?
>
> > If one goal of the UTF-8 proposal is
> > to make encoded-words unnecessary, does the UTF-8 proposal need a
> > language-tagging capability?  Or is this not useful enough to warrant
> > the added complexity?
>
> Language-tagging plain text is rarely necessary.  When necessary, it is
> rarely sufficient.
>
> -- 
> With techies, I've generally found              John Cowan
> If your arguments lose the first round          http://www.reutershealth.com
>     Make it rhyme, make it scan                 http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
>     Then you generally can                      [email protected]
> Make the same stupid point seem profound!           --Jonathan Robie
>