Subj : Is Synchronet UTF8 Ready?
To   : Konstantin Kuzov
From : Maurice Kinal
Date : Mon Feb 27 2017 19:56:45

-={ 2017-02-27 19:56:45.307386294+00:00 }=-

Hey Konstantin!

 KK> This is the only reliable source of actual used codepage.

I disagree.  It is probably the most unreliable source along with other misinformation that I won't get into in this particular echo but could easily atand as evidence why the above quote is disagreeable.

 KK> It doesn't need to be verified in any way.

True.  However if only ascii and utf-8 text messages were the only supported encodings then verification is indeed possible and as a rule highly accurate whereas with 8 bit encodings all bets are off and verification is a waste of time as well as unneeded.  Same with CHRS being a total waste of bytes as it means nothing and does nothing ... or at least *should* do nothing.

 KK> especially in fidonet where dominating codepage is CP866

That doesn't make it right.  In fact I think it is a very good arguement as well as evidence as to what is wrong in fidonet.

 KK> My position didn't changed since then

That is because we have discussed this before.  Now that you have been shown the errors of your ways I am positive that your stance is in dire need of adjustment.  :::evil grin:::

Life is good,
Maurice

.... Forst sceal freosan, fyr wudu meltan, eorþe growan, is brycgian.
    Frost must freeze, fire melt wood, earth grow, ice form bridges.
--- GNU bash, version 4.4.12(1)-release (x86_64-atom-linux-gnu)
 * Origin: Little Mikey's Brain - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001)

.