= Сообщение: 820 из 7128 ======================================= FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Nicholas Boel 1:154/701 10 Dec 13 15:08:22 Кому : mark lewis 10 Dec 13 15:08:22 Тема : UTF-8 FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=1:154/701+52a782c7 На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=1:3634/12.71+2a665ad3 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: UTF-8 ================================== ============================================================================== Hello mark,
09 Dec 13 20:28, you wrote to me:
NB>> I think everyone should be able to write their names exactly how NB>> they are spelled. I'm not sure as to why this is such a huge NB>> argument on Fidonet, but UTF-8, Latin-1 (8859-1), koi8-r, and NB>> every other widely used charset out there should have been dealt NB>> with when Fidonet became an international network.
ml> that was back in the '80s and early '90s... UTF8 was just getting ml> started around '92 and didn't get really going until Jan '93 when it ml> was first presented at the USENIX conference... it wasn't until 2008 ml> when utf-8 was recognised as the most common encoding for html ml> files...
Then now in 2013, most linux distrobutions are using it as the default locale out of the box. While we do not have heaping quanities of newcomers to BBSing and/or Fidonet these days, which probably has some reason as to why we're not seeing a lot more systems show up posting in UTF-8. It is, in fact, becoming the go-to international charset. Obviously M$ will always try to create their own, since it wants all of the marketshare, but it seems linux/unix are all moving in that direction. Fidonet is behind, mainly because of the continued use of old software that will never be able to include support for what the future will bring. If/when this time does come, people will have an difficult choice: update their software, or shut it down for good. I would hope people would choose the first option, but if not, many will be moving on to other things.
NB>> The rules of English speaking only echos can still hold their NB>> weight, but no charset or codepage has ever been deemed the NB>> *only* one you are allowed to use.
ml> because the developers at the time saw the need for being able to ml> translate into other character sets to enable others to communicate ml> easier... unfortunately they weren't as successful as they could have ml> been and they left fidonet for various reasons before they could ml> complete their tasks with their software... many left in disgust due ml> to others actions and posts which we still see a lot of similar type ml> stuff today... some few remain but they don't release their code or ml> talk about their work because of the way others talk to and about ml> them...
The translations are great, don't get me wrong. But for some reason, my GoldEd cp866 -> utf-8 and koi8-r -> utf-8 translation tables that come with it don't seem to work very well when it comes to Cyrillic. Maybe some of those characters weren't translated at all, or it could even be possible that some people are throwing the wrong CHRS kludge on a message without knowing. Could also be because GoldEd doesn't currently support UTF-8 unless you use the odd 'workaround'. I don't know. I do know that I can open any raw packet in nano and so far have been able to see most of what others and I have thrown at it exactly how it's supposed to be seen. That leads me to believe it's the editor. :)
NB>> It has been said in the past, people that don't care to upgrade NB>> or re-configure their software to this day and age will see NB>> garbage on their screens. So what? It doesn't break anything on NB>> their end, except their visual experience.
ml> and that's over half of the reason to participate in the network... if ml> everyone i converse with were to switch to using utf-8 and non-ASCII ml> characters, i would probably leave, too... unless i was able to ml> develop something that fit my needs... whether i do that or not ml> remains to be seen but i do have several megs of code that i have ml> written which is sitting idle and has been for years... some i used to ml> use during development with an eye to releasing it for others to use ml> but the abuse took that idea away and lead to a quite angry and ml> abusive life due to others actions...
This wasn't really directed at using utf-8 and non-ascii characters in messages to the point noone would understand it. This was more of a discussion on people being able to write their names how they should be written. Most of what you see in regular messages will still be readable.
Then again, the same thing could be said about "high ascii" characters being used. When one types them in ibmpc or cp437 they need to be translated to latin-1 or utf-8. I don't even know of any current OSs that use ibmpc or cp437 anymore. Maybe OS/2?
NB>> That is not the fault of people wanting to keep their software in NB>> the current century in regards to international keymaps, NB>> charsets, and codepages. *shrug*
ml> the problem is that even though you may be able to properly see eg: ml> cryllic or greek or chinese glyphs, it doesn't really help you read ml> and participate in the conversation... at best you might be able to ml> paste it into a translator and get something that might or might not ml> make sense in english...
First thing is first. You need to be able to see it properly to even try to translate or understand it. You have to start somewhere, and as I mentioned before, if I could see it properly, I may actually be interested in carrying some popular echos here just for the simple fact of venturing into the rest of the world.
ml> anecdote: i had to really laugh earlier at another's utf-8 postings ml> where their russian version offered several variations of 'protein' ml> first and finally offered 'squirrel' as an option... really?
ml> "i have protein in my pants" ml> OR ml> "i have a squirrel in my pants"
ml> :LOLOLOL:
ml> at least that was better than that translator that rhymes with 'thing' ml> ;)
The only real translators you can trust are real people that are fluent in both languages. I'm sure there's different meanings in the way you say things (just like English) that computers will never understand. At least you can get a general idea of what someone is trying to say with the online translators, even though often it may be completely wrong at the same time. :)
ml> agreed to a point... did you know that what many folk consider to be ml> "modern" software (ie: internet apps) really use '60s tech for their ml> transmissions? eg: attaching a binary to an email... the binary is ml> translated into plain ascii and gains generally 1/3rd the size it ml> would be without the translation (MIME, UUE, XXE) ;)
Is that because it's easier to use a library or point your code at something that's already in existance that has worked for many years, rather than doing it yourself? If so, you can just chalk that up to lazy coding practice, I suppose. I'm sure careered people are usually on strict deadlines, so why write a new library, or make something from scratch, when something is already there and easy to implement, which will save you time so you can grab a beer the night before turning in your project, rather than cramming all night to get that project done before work the next day? :)
Regards, Nick
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130910 * Origin: Dark Sorrow | darksorrow.us (1:154/701)
