At 09:55 PM 07/11/2000 -0800, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Oh no, here comes a flame war.
>
>Robert A. Rosenberg <Bob.Rosenberg@digitscorp.com> wrote:
>
> > The problem would go away if the ISO would get their heads out of
> > their a$$ and drop the C1 junk from the NEW 'TOUCHED UP" 8859s and
> > put the CP125x codes there.
>
>The problem would be just beginning for all the users of terminals and
>terminal emulators that apparently rely on C1 control codes. These
>folks argue that UTF-8 is defective because it sends bytes in the range
>0x80 to 0x9F to their terminal when no C1 code was intended, and/or
>because real C1 sequences are prefaced by 0xC2. Some even go so far
>as to claim that an 8-bit character set is not "legitimate" unless it
>supports ISO 2022 and therefore C1. Try telling these people that C1
>characters are "junk."
That is an issue with the software that is driving the Terminal or Terminal
Emulator NOT with the input to the program. In an Email message (or in an
HTML Page Source) C1 characters have no purpose (ie: they do not represent
Glyphs or the few C0 functions [CR/LF/TAB?]that are used for these types of
data transport) so the fact that some HARDWARE DEVICE needs them is not a
reason for leaving them in codes that are used for inter-computer data
transfer.
>-Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:05 EDT