From: Asmus Freytag (asmusf@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2009 - 11:44:43 CST
On 1/5/2009 9:16 AM, James Kass wrote:
> Asmus Freytag wrote,
>
>
>> Telephone text messages are not a closed system, because telecoms
>> typically provide means to connect to incoming and outgoing email at the
>> minimum.
>>
>
> E-mail can be plain-text or rich-text. There has
> never been any requirement that all the information
> contained within a rich-text document will be
> round-trippable with a plain-text application.
>
Right, but these are data streams that use a plain-text protocol, no
matter how you'd wish you could redefine that.
>
>> You can expect these codes to leak onto the web in due course,
>> if this is not happening already. Whatever the mechanism for that
>> leakage, what Peter is rightly objecting to is a world where text in
>> open interchange needlessly contains units that are un-interpretable.
>>
>> It doesn't matter whether one or two vendors are causing this - as long
>> as their system isn't *closed*, it's not true private interchange.
>>
>
> Suppose for a moment that you and I are sociable
> Japanese schoolgirls
That would exhaust my ration for imagination for the next six weeks at
least. ;-)
> Text messages sent between cell phone users aren't
> any concern of Unicoders or search engines. Or
> anybody else, for that matter.
>
That might be your opinion, but I don't think that this is a consensus
position in the character encoding committees.
> The private nature of these messages fits very well
> within the framework of PUA.
>
So I am now to use PUA when I write you off-list ;-)
A./
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2009 - 11:47:40 CST