[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Linux Capabilities
On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Oron Peled wrote:
> On 05-Aug-98 Uri Bruck wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 3 Aug 1998, Oron Peled wrote:
> >> You probably meant iso-8859-1 (one and not lower case letter i)
> > His message was sent with one of MS- outlook thingies which says it uses
> > Hebrew implicit, hence the lower case i.
> > His mailer did not invent it, it's standard usage.
>
> Standard? Since when? Can you enlighten us all and point us to
> some RFC number or some ISO document about it?
The following is a quote from RFC 1556, authored by Hank Nusbacher:
" Fortunately, ECMA (European Computer Manufacturers Association) has
tackled this problem previously and has issued a technical report
called "Handling of Bi-Directional Texts". ECMA TR/53, as it is
called, was used to update the Standard ECMA-48 which in turn was
used as the basis for ISO/IEC 6429 which was adopted under a special
"fast track procedure". It is based on this information that a new
character set is being defined which will indicate that the bi-
directional message is either encoded in implicit mode or explicit
mode. The default is visual mode which requires no special character
set other than the standard ones previously defined by ISO-8859.
Examples of new character sets for bi-directionality support:
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-6-e
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-6-i
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-8-e
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-8-i
Nussbacher [Page 1]
RFC 1556 Bi-directional Texts December 1993
The "i" suffix refers to implicit mode and the "e" suffix refers to
explicit mode.
"
>
> His mailer DID invent it! And did it contrary to existing standards.
> The "iso-..." in the font name stands for "International Standards
> Organization". I don't recall that Microsoft has bought this institution :-)
>
> Beware all from improper use of the word "standard" -- it does not mean
> M$-product :-)
>
> >> While we are at this subject, why are you mailing the same message both
> >> as text and html? Are repeating phrases while talking as well? <p>Are you
> >> repeating phrases while talking as well?</p>
> >
> > Settings on the mailer - I doubt the original sender sees it that way in
> > his outbox. I assume the option can be disbled.
>
> I would like to remind that this is a Linux forum not an Outlook one.
> If some poor soul has to use this product, they are at least expected
> to be polite enough to set it up in a Unix/Linux friendly manner.
> I don't expect people on THIS LIST to mail '.doc' files, even if they
> do it in other forums.
Is that a reason to insult a person? Point out his mistake. If he turns
out to be offensive later, or insists, as I've seen someone on another
list, that everyone should upgrade to html capable email software :) then
you surely know that the person has no place here.
Uri