Text 6713, 170 rader
Skriven 2013-02-20 13:22:36 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.42)
   Kommentar till text 6684 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: ö is o umlaut, œ is the British Pound, ¾ is the Yen.
============================================================
 ml>> where were you during the months and months long ""debate"" in 
 ml>> NET_DEV years ago when this was the primary topic of 
 ml>> "discussion"??

 MvdV>> That was how long ago? 15 years? 20 Years? The world changes, 
 MvdV>> even the museum of Fidonet is not entirely static.

 ml> i know this but this factor was decided long ago and only since 
 ml> then have erronoeus implementations been done...

 MvdV> So the new devolopers decided they were not bound by that
 MvdV> decision.

highly doubtful... i dare say that the majority ot "new developers" never heard
of NET_DEV and if they did, they weren't around to read those posts and that
then means that they did not know of that decision so they could not decide
that it did not bind them...

 MvdV> And rightly so, the participants of the late NET_DEV are not an 
 MvdV> authoritative body that can decide for all eternity what the 
 MvdV> next generation may or may not do. 

NET_DEV was never intended to be authoritive... the FTSC publishes documents
that it accepts as standards... the developers create those standards and the
software that adheres to them... this is the main reason why i stated in the
MAKENLNG echo that they should just go ahead and fix the problem(s) regardless
of what the standard states because they are setting the new standard... i'm
pretty sure i also wrote this in the FTSC echo as well... especially when you
posted that you were adjusting the existing standard so that the MAKENLNG folks
could continue and make their new release...

 ml>  when we lost Goram Eriksson, we also lost NET_DEV and thus the
 ml> discussion area for this work...

 MvdV> NET_DEV was dead long before Goran's demise. The professional
 MvdV> programmers left for greener pastures.

no sir, it was not... it was slower than it had been in years past, yes, but it
was not dead... it wasn't until Goran's echolisting for NET_DEV expired and was
removed from the echolist that the backbone(s) dropped carrying it... if i had
realized at the time why traffic in NET_DEV had suddenly disappeared, i'd have
relisted NET_DEV then and continued on with it instead of waiting until now...

 MvdV>>> And common sense tells us that OF COURSE one uses the same
 MvdV>>> encoding in the header as in the message body. Of course, what
 MvdV>>> else?

 ml>> in the above mentioned debate, it was finally realized that you 
 ml>> could NOT apply the message body CHRS/CHARACTERSET control line 
 ml>> to the header BECAUSE it was not known until /after/ the header 
 ml>> was already processed... all of the participants involved in that 
 ml>> huge bruhaha

 MvdV>> And where are these now? I bet all but a handful have left
 MvdV>> Fidonet.

 ml> they have but that doesn't matter, either... in the flow of
 ml> processing, it doesn't makes sense,

 MvdV> There is a lot in Fionet that does not make sense. We deal with
 MvdV> it anyway. 

yes, we do... unfortunately at times...

 ml>  anyway... you start at the top and move down thru the data just 
 ml> like with most anything else...

 MvdV> So just consider the kludge lines part of an extended header and
 MvdV> parse them too. 

it adds complication when one is performing a header only listing (as was given
as a recent example by someone else)... especially since control lines can be
spread throughout the message body as has been done in the past...

 MvdV>> As I wrote: the world is not static. What was agreed on 15or 20
 MvdV>> years ago, can be disagreed on now.

 ml> yes, i know... you love doing it just to do it, too :/

 MvdV> It happens in the real world all the time. Widen your horizon. 

the same can be and has been said to you ;)

 ml>> that it was going to be hard to apply anything to the header with 
 ml>> the current format(s) being used...

 MvdV>> What was hard 15 years ago, need not be so hard now.

 ml> agreed to a point...

 MvdV> Finally...

make sure you note that point... it is significant...

 MvdV>>> This is simply a bug in Jamnntp, it has nothing to do with
 MvdV>>> inadequate standards.

 ml>> i cannot agree with that...

 MvdV>> Then we have to agree to disagree.

 ml> no, i don't want to! :lol:

 MvdV> Fine, than agree not to disagree.

nope! :LOL:

 ml>> especially with your incorrect statements above about how the
 ml>> CHRS/CHARACTERSET control lines are/were to be applied...

 MvdV>> Sorry, but current practise is that text in the header uses the 
 MvdV>> same encoding as that for the message body. Like it or not, it
 MvdV>> IS current practise.

 ml> i definitely do not agree there...

 MvdV> You can disagree all you want, that does not alter the facts.

sure it does... /some/ current practise may be doing that but not *ALL* current
practise is doing it...

 MvdV> The fact is that the new generation has freed itself from the 
 MvdV> ASCII only strangehold. This didn't happen today or yesterday, 
 MvdV> it happened many years ago when the Russians entered the scene. 
 MvdV> The Russians have taken over and they have done most of the 
 MvdV> development since the turn of the century.

it started much earlier than that... at least as far back as 1988... what
happened then was due to politics and folks raising hell with the way things
were headed because they didn't like it... this is one of the main reason why
so many developers left fidonet... it is also one of the main reasons why
developers still in the network shelves their projects... i'm one of those
developers and you were one of those on the other side of the line but you
weren't anywhere near as bad as others... especially when it comes down to not
understanding what terms like "gating" mean and causing other developers to
halt their development even today... this has actually happened in very recent
times...

 MvdV> You can moan and groan, stamp your feet and dig up 20 year old
 MvdV> "decisions", it is not going to turn back the clock. The ASCII
 MvdV> only age is over and the default encoding is not CP437.

sure it is... it is one of several used throughout the network... so please
correct your statement by replacing "the" with "a" and removing "not"...

 ml> how can you tell it? what are you using to decide it? where's the
 ml> proof? can you prove a negative, yet?

 MvdV> Just look at the subject line of this message. It reads:

 MvdV> "ö is o umlaut, œ is the British Pound, ¾ is the Yen."

 MvdV> It contains characters encoded in the same coding as the message
 MvdV> body. 

i can easily see the ö and œ in the subject line... the yen, however, is
something else and not the Y with the line(s) across it "�" ALT-157 in CP437...
at least not in the message body... i can't see all of the subject in this
reader while writing a reply but i will look later when i finish my new mail
scan and replies...

 MvdV> What more do you need?

more cooperation and less heavy-handedness from those who think they know
better than anyone else for one thing ;)

)\/(ark

--- 
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.42)