Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!enea!sommar From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) Newsgroups: eunet.followup,comp.std.internat Subject: Re: Code Page Conversion Message-ID: <1973@enea.se> Date: 8 Aug 90 20:13:27 GMT References: Organization: Enea Data AB, Sweden Lines: 39 (The first attempt didn't seem to leave our site. Apologies if you are seeing this twice.) Uwe Geuder (geuder@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de) writes: >From Keld J|rn Simonsen: > I use it in email, it is build into the sendmail we use here, > and EUnet has decided to run this on an experimental basis > on all the backbones of EUnet. > >What does this mean? When I get mail from Sweden, it's still in Swedish >ASCII (is that SSCII??), which is horrible too read on (US) ASCII devices >used in Germany (German 7-bit Code is never used here). If I run conv SE US >on such files they get much prettier. So I can't imagine that any host in >between has already done it. Or is there no "EUnet backbone" between Sweden >and Germany? I get a little anxious here, but I may misunderstand some things here. I certainly don't want mail I send out to be automatically transformed when they get out. Yes, I understand that occurrances of ][\}{| are not nice to read, but it seems a risky business to translate them straight off. If I use them in an non-Swedish mail, I usually explain them. With a non-wanted transformation, that would look a little stupid. (And how does the machine know that I use an "[" as a dotted capital "A" and not as a left bracket?) Wouldn't it be better, if this was done at receiver's end on request? Another question: Through a mailing-list I have indirectly received a list of two-character code stemming from Keld Simonsen. I don't know whether it is this one we discuss, but I would assume so. I must admit that I laid that one aside with the thought: "My God, how unreadable and what an overkill!" I tend to think I missed some points with its purpose. Could Keld or anyone else clarify? And a final question: we are moving into an eight-bit world. Instead of relying on old standards, why not aim to have Eunet work with ISO 8859/1 instead? (8859 is apparently already obsolete with the recent changes in Eastern Europe, but that is another matter.) -- Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se