On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 01:35:14AM +0900, Dan Kogai wrote:
> Mule has been using a funky internal encodings for a long time
> and no one complains.
See <http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-mule/200012/msg00010.html>,
titled "More disgusting evidence that Mule is evil :-("
> Its true success or failure should be judged as external encodings.
Why? Considering as ISO646-DE will still be accepted by many mailers,
I think it'll take at least a decade until most mailers will stop
handling ISO8859-1 and EUC-JP. Full data conversion will take longer.
Recently, I've tried to convince Project Gutenberg people to turn all
the CP437/CP850 stuff to Latin-1. How many decades before it all gets
turned to Unicode? For properly marked data, like MIME mail, it's all
Unicode to a decent system anyway.
Unicode as an external encoding is interesting, but more useful is the
fact that programs can handle Unicode and that it's available for
internal use. The programmers can deal with one charset, and the users can
switch to Unicode; anything more is really gravy.
-- David Starner - starner@okstate.edu "It's not a habit; it's cool; I feel alive. If you don't have it you're on the other side." - K's Choice (probably referring to the Internet)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Mar 21 2002 - 15:49:22 EST