= Сообщение: 431 из 1367 ============================================= UTF-8 = От : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555 01 Mar 17 16:33:47 Кому : Konstantin Kuzov 01 Mar 17 16:33:47 Тема : oh those russians FGHI : area://UTF-8?msgid=2:280/5555+58b6e9dc На : area://UTF-8?msgid=2:5019/40.1+58b6a406 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: UTF-8 ================================== Ответ: area://UTF-8?msgid=2:5019/40.1+58b7e7c6 ============================================================================== Hello Konstantin,
On Wednesday March 01 2017 13:35, you wrote to Maurice Kinal:
KK>>> Using CP1251 exactly where? And why don't KOI8-R? Or even KK>>> ISO-8859-5?
MK>> Do you have any statistics to back any of that up? I only went by MK>> what I've witnessed in the past.
KK> Why I need to back anything up? It was yours assumption that most KK> Russian users using CP1251.
Indeed, it was he who claimed wide spread use of CP1251. The onus of proof is on the one making the claim.
All I can say is that I have never seen a message encoded in CP1251 in Fidonet. What I see is CP437, CP850, Latin-1, and CP866.
MK>> At one time the majority of Russian sites appeared to be KOI8-R MK>> based but not anymore. I see mostly UTF-8 these days
While it is true that most of the World Wide Web has migrated to UTF-8, we should keep in mind that Fidonet is not the Internet. As you have pointed out, the vast majority of Fidonet messages still use 8 bit encoding. The UTF-8 evangelists in here may wish it different, but the reality is that we still have a long way to go before UTF-8 will be the dominant encoding for Fidonet and it is quit likely that will never happen.
KK> If you don't care that you messages could not be read correctly then KK> you can continue to write with bogus or missing codepage information. KK> But if it was in my power I would have restricted such traffic and KK> treat it as a case of 1.3.5 with all its consequences.
