NB> Golded only displayed half of the characters in that one. The NB> other half were mangled, but as soon as I shelled to nano to NB> reply, everything is there as it should be. :)
Add to that the kludge in your reply says "CHRS: UTF-8 2" which is wrong according to FTSC standards but is correct with respect to Unicode standards for UTF-8 wheres Golded puts a "CHRS: UTF-8 4" kludge which in reality is bogus since it really cannot REALLY live up to the Unicode UTF-8 standards.
Also, while I am at it, I *could* bring up the phoney-baloney TZUTC kludge but I won't.
NB> Maybe we should just develop an arealister
I think what you are currently doing with Golded/nano is probably the best things get for what you really want at this point in time despite the "CHRS: UTF-8 2" kludge. I fail to see why it should be okay to send a dishonourable kludge (Golded's UTF-8 4) and not okay to send an honourable kludge (hpt's UTF-8 2) which only happens to be wrong because some Fidonet 8-bit DOS-think hacker says it is wrong when it obviously isn't wrong ... other than the level part that is which looks to be totally bogus from this angle anyhow.
Heck it isn't like the FTSC will do anything about it anyhow. I've seen much worse behavior, such as the phoney-baloney TZUTC kludge which I am not mentioning in this particular reply. :-)
Life is good, Maurice
... A Møøse once bit my sister ... --- GNU bash, version 4.2.45(2)-release (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) * Origin: Pointy Stick Society - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001.0)
