Board:   [fsxNet] Test messages
Subject: Test Reply
From:    Accession(21:1/200)
Date:    Sun Sep 06, 2026 08:47

Hey deon!

On Sat, 05 Sep 2026 10:10:44 +1000, you wrote:

 > 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.

Definitely technically incorrect, and now that Golded's unicode fork is reporting messages that are not translated properly, I figured I'd mention it.

 > 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.

Yeah, if your reply was strictly ASCII, I doubt there would be a problem with any CHRS kludge.

 > 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?).

For the record, CP437 translates just fine to UTF-8 (I'm using a UTF-8 terminal). So far, the only issue I've seen is your reply has CP437 line drawing characters, which can not translate to ASCII.

 > 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...

Understood, and I'd tend to agree with that. You might be better off making your reply ASCII only then, so it can be translated to everything.

Regards,
Nick

.... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20260904
 * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (21:1/200)
.