Board:   [fsxNet] Test messages
Subject: Test Reply
From:    deon(21:2/116)
Date:    Sat Sep 05, 2026 09:10

  Re: Test Reply
  By: Accession to Clearing Houz on Fri Sep 04 2026 11:09 am

Hey Nick,

 > When this auto-replies to a message that uses the "CHRS: ASCII 1" kludge
 > (which will probably be the majority of messages created with newer
 > Synchronet systems from here on out), your border comes out like this. Your
 > border is made with CP437 characters, which can not be translated to ASCII.

Clrghouz, when generating it's reply, will reuse the originating message's CHRS kludge, but if it is absent it'll add "CP437 2". I know this is technically incorrect and have noticed it in some usage.

But I did it that way on the assumption that atleast the reply would render on their systems (most of the time) if not for everybody else who are using a different CHRS terminal. Since changing the test message to use more CP437 chars, that is probably a bad assumption too now.

I've noticed also the boarders are not rendering on the right side for some messages, especially when some source systems are using line endings of \r\n, or ANSI escape sequences in their messages.

 > Would it be a better scenario of your bordered auto-reponses to ASCII
 > messages didn't translate at all, and just stayed in CP437 coming from your
 > system? You would obviously still be posting the CHRS kludge /they/ used in
 > their original header. But at this point you're breaking proper
 > translations.

I've been think that I need to improve the rendering of the test messages, for non CP437 2 originated messages. I do see it render badly for my muffinterm (CP437) terminal, for some messages. I'm actually wondering how (badly) it renders for the originator's terminal - noticably UTF-8, and I guess ASCII 1 (which I wasnt aware SBBS was changing?).

I was hoping to get away of translating the source message to CP437 2, or having different CHRS based headers that match the source's CHRS kludge...


....δεσ∩
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
 * Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)
.